logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2014.05.01 2013구합31479
요양급여비용환수처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a doctor operating a B Hospital located in the Osan-si (hereinafter “instant hospital”).

B. On March 12, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract on consignment operation with D operated by the Plaintiff, his wife, and with a deposit of KRW 1150 million,00,000,000,000 for a cafeteria within the instant hospital (hereinafter “the instant cafeteria”).

(hereinafter “First Operating Agreement”). The main contents of the first Operating Agreement are as stated in the attached Form 2 “One Operating Agreement.”

C. D and E (hereinafter “E”) concluded a re-entrusted operation contract for the instant cafeteria on April 19, 2010.

(hereinafter “Second Operating Agreement”). The main contents of the Second Operating Agreement are as indicated in attached Form 3 “Second Operating Agreement.”

The Plaintiff paid to D all of the in-patients received from the Defendant from May 2010 to January 2012.

E claimed, from May 2010 to January 2012, the amount calculated by deducting the management expenses for dietitians, cooks, etc. of the instant cafeterias from the meal service costs under the second operation contract (from May 2010 to July 2011, approximately KRW 12 million per month, around August 201, around KRW 33 million around September 201, and around KRW 10 million from October 201 to January 201) and water, electricity, gas, etc.

E. On October 15, 2012, the Gyeonggi Local Police Agency notified the Defendant of the results of the investigation into the crime of fraud that the Plaintiff, by deceiving the Defendant, acquired an in-patient surcharge from the Defendant, KRW 522,804,766.

As the premises of this case is substantially entrusted to E, it is not necessary to request the dietitian's additional charge (50 won in the first restaurant), the cook's additional charge (50 won in the first restaurant), and the selective group additional charge (620 won in the first restaurant) from among the medical care benefit costs paid by the defendant.

Nevertheless, the plaintiff and C are medical care benefit costs.

arrow