(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.10.5. 선고 2017구합54982 판결

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 61,876,718 won with 5% interest per annum from December 2, 2017 to October 5, 2018 and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit, 2/3 shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

Purport of claim

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 174,43,210 won with 15% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Presumed facts and the background of the filing of the instant lawsuit;

(a) Conclusion of an agreement on consignment operation of B business;

On December 29, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into an entrusted operation agreement in B (hereinafter referred to as the "entrusted operation agreement in 2012") in 2012 with the head of the Seoul Regional Employment Agency and the head of the Seoul Regional Employment Agency (hereinafter referred to as the "instant business") to carry out the entrusted operation agreement in December 31, 2012, and the "Entrusted operation agreement in 2013" (hereinafter referred to as the "Entrusted Operation agreement in this case") with the same content on December 31, 2012.

B. Details of the instant business

1) Purposes of the project

The instant project supervised by the Ministry of Employment and Labor is based on Articles 25 and 34 of the Framework Act on Employment Policy, Article 25(1) of the Employment Insurance Act, and Article 7 of the Special Act on the Promotion of Youth Employment, while providing opportunities for employment to young people having difficulties in employment at the same time having difficulties in employment.

In order to arrange human resources suitable for small enterprises, 50% of the salary for the internship period of up to six months (limited to 80,000 won per month) shall be subsidized to the employing enterprise (hereinafter referred to as the above-mentioned subsidy), and in case of conversion into regular employment in the future, 650,000 won per month shall be additionally subsidized for six months. The Ministry of Employment and Labor shall determine and publicly notify the 'B Implementation Guidelines' (hereinafter referred to as the "Implementation Guidelines") every year for the implementation of the project in this case.

2) Roles of each Party

A) The head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency, which is an employment center, shall grant, settle, and refund the entrusted operation expenses and the internship subsidy to an institution that entered into an entrusted operation agreement on the instant project, such as the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the “operating institution”). The expenses paid for the smooth implementation of the operating institution, calculated as KRW 300,000 per intern employed by a small and medium enterprise through the operating institution, and paid the amount.

B) The operating agency shall guide and publicize the instant project to unemployed youth, small and medium enterprises, etc., and shall receive applications for internships who wish to participate in the instant project and applications for small and medium enterprises. The operating agency shall verify their eligibility and enter into an agreement on the internship support with the desired enterprise, and shall grant an internship subsidy to small and medium enterprises (small and medium enterprises that selected unemployed youth as above and provide opportunities for training and employment as an intern) that employ internships through the intermediation of the operating agency.

C) The implementing company shall enter into an internship agreement with young people and pay wages to them. The head of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency shall terminate the entrusted operation agreement of each of the instant case and take measures to refund, etc.

1) On September 29, 2014, the head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency notified the Plaintiff of the termination date of the entrusted operation agreement to the effect that “the instant entrusted operation agreement shall be terminated on September 22, 2014 with the date of termination of the entrusted operation agreement under Article 11 (Termination and Recovery of Entrustment Agreement) of the instant 2013 on the ground that the designation of an intern disqualified following the Plaintiff’s false good offices, the illegal receipt of subsidies, and the use of the funds are confirmed.” The termination date of the entrusted operation agreement to the Plaintiff is as of February 24, 2014 (the termination date of the entrusted operation agreement as above).”

2) On December 7, 2015, the Administrator of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency notified the Plaintiff that part of the expenses for entrusted operation (including work bonus) and the expense for internship, etc. already paid to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was not paid for the first application for the payment of internship subsidies, in cases where the Plaintiff had the implementing company directly select an intern without the approval of the head of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency, and then was employed by the Plaintiff through the Plaintiff’s recommendation, and the implementing company was employed by converting the existing employee into an internship, and that the Plaintiff was not paid for the first application for the payment of internship subsidies, etc. (hereinafter “the notification of the refund of the expenses for entrusted operation, etc. of this case”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff fully returned the money indicated below.

A person shall be appointed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 14, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The parties' assertion

1) The plaintiff's assertion

A) Even though each of the instant consignment management agreements and the instant guidelines do not constitute grounds for termination, the head of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency notified the termination of each of the instant consignment management agreements.

Since each of the entrusted operation agreements of this case cannot be deemed terminated, the plaintiff has the right to receive the expenses for entrusted operation and the amount of job bulletin for the part that performed the duties in accordance with each of the above agreements.

B) Even if each of the instant consignment management agreements was terminated, each of the instant consignment management agreements has the nature of a delegation agreement. As such, the delegating person is obligated to pay the fees and expenses for handling delegated affairs (which combined the above remuneration and expenses for handling delegated affairs; hereinafter referred to as “compensation for handling delegated affairs”) performed to the mandatary prior to the termination of the delegation agreement. Therefore, the Plaintiff has the right to be paid the remuneration for delegated affairs and the amount of job-related publication as remuneration for performing delegated affairs. In particular, the head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency notified the termination of each of the instant consignment management agreements on February 24, 2014, based on the settlement base date as of February 24, 2014, the head of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency calculated the refund as of February 24, 2014, and notified the refund of the instant consignment management expenses, etc., but the Plaintiff has the right to receive a report on the relevant part of delegated affairs.

C) Examining the details of the notification of the refund of the instant consignment management expenses by the Administrator of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency, the Defendant was entitled to receive the Plaintiff’s total consignment management expenses and the number of job gazettes for the pertinent intern on the ground that “the Plaintiff was granted a refund of the expenses for entrusted operation expenses and the number of job gazettes for the pertinent intern without approval,” and that “the Plaintiff was employed as an intern but failed to meet the requirements for the payment of the expenses for entrusted operation because the Plaintiff failed to perform the first application for the payment of the internship subsidies.” However, the Plaintiff performed most of the duties under the instant consignment management agreement in relation to the employment of the above intern, so the Plaintiff was entitled to receive the refund of the expenses for entrusted operation expenses for the pertinent intern on the ground that “the contract amount under each of the instant consignment management agreements or the total amount of the contract amount under each of the instant consignment management expenses and employment news reports for the pertinent intern,” and thus, the Defendant was obligated to receive the aforementioned amount of unjust enrichment from the Plaintiff without any legal basis, 343,2101.

2) The defendant's assertion

A) The Plaintiff’s direct selection of an intern without the approval of the head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office constitutes a case where the Plaintiff failed to implement the essential part of the agreement on the entrusted operation of each of the instant case, and thus, the Defendant is not obliged to pay the expenses for the entrusted operation of each of the instant agreements.

B) According to the Ministry of Employment and Labor’s Guidelines for Settlement of Government Subsidies (hereinafter “Settlement Guidelines”) the Ministry of Employment and Labor requires the Defendant to pay the expenses for entrusted operation related to the pertinent intern only when the application for the payment of the internship subsidies was made at least once. Therefore, the Plaintiff is not obliged to pay the expenses for entrusted operation to the Defendant with respect to the intern who performed the first application for the payment of the internship subsidies directly by the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office because the Plaintiff failed to perform the duties for the first application for the payment of the internship subsidies.

C) Even if the expenses for entrusted operation are of the nature of remuneration for entrusted operation, since each of the instant entrusted operation agreements was terminated due to the reasons attributable to the Plaintiff, the right to claim remuneration under Article 686(3) of the Civil Act is not recognized.

D) The expenses for entrusted operation constitute subsidies under the Subsidy Management Act (hereinafter “Subsidy Management Act”), and there is no obligation to pay the expenses for entrusted operation to the Plaintiff who committed an unlawful act pursuant to Articles 30(1) and 31-2(1) of the Subsidy Management Act.

(b) Related statutes;

Attached Form 1 shall be as listed in attached Table 1.

1) The terms and conditions of each entrusted operation agreement of this case and the guidelines for the implementation of this case

A) The main contents of each of the instant consignment operation agreements are as follows (each of the instant consignment operation agreements shall be entered into on the basis of the consignment operation agreement of the instant year 2012 with the content of the instant consignment operation agreement, and the instant consignment operation agreement of the instant year 2013 shall be entered in the overall title only in the changed part).

Article 1 (Purpose) of the 2012 Entrusted Operation Agreement, the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office and the Plaintiff shall determine the matters necessary for the entrusted operation of the business (the instant business) and enter into an agreement on the entrusted operation of B in 2012 in order to faithfully comply therewith. The effective period of this agreement shall be from January 2, 2012 to the date the settlement of the project cost of the internship (the internship subsidy, the entrusted project cost, etc.) for the pertinent year is completed (the effective period of this agreement shall be from January 1, 2013 to the settlement of the project cost (the internship subsidy, the entrusted project cost, etc.) for the pertinent year. The Seoul Employment and Labor Office shall provide the Plaintiff with the following affairs among the youth and youth enterprises, the guidance for the implementation of the internship project and the guidance for the implementation of the project, the guidance for the implementation of which is the applicant for employment and management of the project, and the guidance for the implementation of the project, the applicant for employment and management of the project, who is the applicant for early guidance and the applicant for the project:

(1) The Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office shall, upon a request of the plaintiff, make a quarter to the Government necessary for the operation of the internship system.

The Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency shall pay 300,000 won per capita for expenses incurred in the performance of entrusted projects under each paragraph of Article 4 (entrusted Business Expenses) within seven days from the date the Plaintiff requests: Provided, That performance evaluation organizations, etc. may reflect performance evaluation programs, etc., and pay incentives. (1) The Plaintiff shall comply with the standards set out in the guidelines of the Government Guidelines and shall not use the subsidies for internship projects for other purposes.(3) The Government subsidies that the Plaintiff unfairly paid in violation of the guidelines of this case and this Agreement shall not be promptly returned to the Plaintiff.The Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency shall not cancel the entrusted business operation guidelines of the 150,000 won per capita for full-time workers (the 10,000 won for full-time workers) or cancel the entrusted business operation guidelines of the Plaintiff (the Seoul Local Employment and Labor Agency shall cancel the entrusted business operation guidelines of the 201,000,0000 won for each of its full-time workers) or more than 10,000,0000 won.

경우에는 부당하게 사용 또는 지급한 지원금은 원고가 자체 부담하여야 한다.제15조(제재) 원고가 이 사건 지침 및 이 약정을 위반하여 위법·부당하게 사업을 수행한 경우에는 이 사건 시행지침에 따라 서울지방고용노동청이 내리는 제재조치에 따라야 한다.| 제16조(지도감독의 수인)① 서울지방고용노동청은 원고에 대하여 사업 이행실적 파악, 그 밖의 관리감독을 위해 관련서류의 제출을 요구할 수 있고 원고는 이에 성실히 따라야 한다.② 서울지방고용노동청은 사업의 진행상황 파악, 지도·감독 등을 위하여 필요한 경우 원고의사업현장을 방문하거나 관련서류를 열람할 수 있고, 원고는 이에 성실히 따라야 한다.제18조(준용) 이 약정에 명기되지 아니한 사항에 대해서는 관계법령, 이 사건 시행지침, 기타사회통념상 합리적인 기준에 따른다.

B) The main contents of the instant enforcement guidelines are as follows (The instant enforcement guidelines and the enforcement guidelines of the instant year 2012 are replaced by the content thereof. As such, the enforcement guidelines of the instant year 2013 should be stated as of the enforcement guidelines of the instant year 2013, and the enforcement guidelines of the instant year 2012 should be stated separately for the changed parts only).

3. Conclusion of entrusted operation agreements, and the obligations of the operating institution (the obligations of the operating institution) of this case; 3. Conclusion of entrusted operation agreements, and the obligations of the operating institution; 3-2. (The obligations of the operating institution) The operating institution shall comply with the following provisions. The operating institution shall fulfill its duty of care as a good manager in order to comply with the laws and regulations on the budget and management of subsidies and to reasonably operate the internship system. If it violates these guidelines and the entrusted operation agreements, the operating institution may sign sanctions and corrective measures taken by the employment center and perform them in good faith.

IV.In the case of recruitment of internships, selection and conclusion of agreements on employment for internships; 3. brokerage and employment for internships (in this case, 2013 Implementation Guidelines) (mediations) institutions shall arrange internship employment by reflecting the demand of internships and job-seeking enterprises in accordance with the results of consultation. At the request of ○ enterprise, two or more times or more of the number of employees may be recommended, and the applicant for internships shall explain the general information working conditions of the relevant enterprise. 3-3. (Direct Selection of Executing Enterprises) If the enterprise meets one of the following requirements and has obtained the approval of the employment center directly from the operating institution. If the executing enterprise intends to directly select the internships, it shall submit to the employment center having jurisdiction over the operating institution an application for approval (9) for direct selection of the executing enterprise. After examining whether the executing enterprise meets the requirements for direct selection of the job-seeking enterprise, the executing institution shall exceptionally determine whether the enterprise directly selects the number of employees and notify the applicant of the plan for direct selection of the working workforces.

○ If an executing company meets the above direct selection requirements intends to directly select an intern, it shall submit a plan for recruitment of an intern to the employment center under the jurisdiction of the operating institution via the relevant operating institution, to the employment center under the jurisdiction of the operating institution. After reviewing the direct selection requirements of the operating institution, employment mediation efforts for the operating institution, etc., if appropriate, the employment center shall grant approval within seven days from the date of application. In this case, the employment center may subsidize the current status of job seekers eligible to apply for internship from among ordinary job seekers. V. 1. Payment of Government subsidies 1-1. (Support Level) 50% of the agreed wage prescribed in the internship agreement during the internship period. 2. 2. Payment procedures for the internship period of the 1. 2. 2. 2. The implementing company shall pay the subsidy to the operating institution for each full-time intern period of 1. 2. 2. 2. 1. 2. 2. 2. 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2 2. 2 2. 2 2 2. 2 2 2. 2 2 2 2 -2 -2 -2 /1 /1 /1 /3 2 /3 /3 2 2 2 /3 /3 2 /3 /3 /2 /3 2 /2 /3 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /3 /2. /2. /2. /3.

VI. 1. Giving 1-2. (Entrusted Operation Expenses) Costs of the Government Subsidies to the Operating Agency shall be paid for expenses incurred in the implementation of entrusted projects by the Operating Agency, including personnel expenses, extra-scopic expenses (expenses, travel expenses, business promotion expenses, etc.), expropriation expenses (communication and public relations expenses, office supplies expenses), asset acquisition (computer, etc.), guarantee insurance premiums, remittance fees, etc. for the implementation of the project, and other purposes necessary to achieve the objectives of the project; 4.0. The Operating Agency shall be obliged to appropriately manage the entrusted operation expenses and subsidies received in violation of the Guidelines and the Agreement on Circuit Operation, and shall return the amount spent for unlawful use or by fraudulent or other unlawful means. If the Agreement ceases to exist or is terminated due to inevitable reasons, the amount of the subsidy paid shall be returned to the balance of the implementation after the suspension of the project. The Employment Center may repeatedly request the same violation of the Guidelines and the Guidelines on 10.0 days warning and corrective measures, if the Operating Agency violates the Guidelines, and the Guidelines for 20.0 days (1.0 or more) corrective measures to be ordered.

Where the same violation occurs due to the same violation, the agreement may be terminated if the same violation occurs three or more times due to the same violation by warning measures (in the event of non-performance of the agreement) to correct it within ten days for each violation, the agreement may be terminated if one act constitutes several violations. Ⅲ When the agreement is terminated due to the violation, the restriction on the participation in the project in the next year

2) The circumstances leading to the termination of each entrusted operation agreement of the instant case

A) From November 12, 2013 to March 6, 2014, the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency discovered the fact that the above four implementing companies were unlawfully receiving the internship subsidies, etc. from four implementing companies among those that entered into an agreement with the Plaintiff for internship support.

B) From March 18, 2014 to January 23, 2015, the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency conducted an investigation on the whole implementing company that entered into an agreement with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff for the provision of internship support. From March 18, 2014 to January 23, 2015, 109 implementing company selected directly an intern without obtaining the approval of the head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency during the period from 2012 to 2013, it was found that 239 U.S. employees were employed in violation of the instant implementation guidelines by converting an existing employee into a internship and hiring an existing employee as if he were employed by the Plaintiff. In particular, the number of internships employed through the instant false mediation reaches 152 (Ga) and (b).

C) Meanwhile, in the process of the investigation, C, an employee of the Plaintiff, made a statement to the effect that “in the process of the investigation, even if there was no arrangement at the request of the executing company, it prepared the same document as that of the actual arrangement.” In addition, on August 22, 2012, and August 27, 2013, the Plaintiff was employed by the Ministry of Employment and Labor as an intermediary rather than an internal recruitment if the Plaintiff was under a verification from the Ministry of Employment and Labor, and the content of its solicitation was changed.

D) According to the results of the instant investigation, the head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency notified the termination of each of the instant consignment management agreements on grounds of the Plaintiff’s fraudulent good offices, etc., and notified the refund of the instant consignment management expenses, etc. According to the notice of refund of the instant consignment management expenses, etc., the consignment management expenses for the internships employed through the instant false good offices are also included in the instant refund.

(iii) the progress of the relevant lawsuit

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the notification of the repayment of the instant entrusted operation expenses, etc. by Seoul Administrative Court 2016Guhap68373. However, on May 18, 2017, the said court rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s lawsuit on the ground that the notification of the repayment of the instant entrusted operation expenses, etc. falls under a contract under public law and does not fall under an exercise of public authority or an equivalent administrative action as an enforcement of law on specific facts conducted by an administrative agency. The said judgment was finalized on June 6, 2017 because the Plaintiff did not file an appeal.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 14, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 11, 12, 15 through 18, and the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

1) Determination on the illegality of the termination of each of the instant consignment operation agreements

According to 'IX. post management' 3-4 (Attachment 2) of the enforcement guidelines of this case, the plaintiff asserts that it constitutes a ground for termination of the contract only when the "institution" illegally received the internship subsidy.

However, according to 'IX. post management' 3-4(2) of the implementation guidelines of this case, 'Operational Agency' constitutes grounds for termination of the contract in case of fraudulent receipt of government subsidies, and according to 'The implementation guidelines of this case' Ⅱ and 'Government subsidies', government subsidies are composed of entrusted operation expenses, internship subsidies, etc.

Therefore, although the plaintiff employed the internship through the fraudulent referral of this case, the expenses for the entrusted operation of the above internship were drawn up as if he had arranged for employment in accordance with the guidelines for the implementation of this case and received from the head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office. Thus, this constitutes "the case where the operating agency in attached Form 3-4 (2) of the implementation guidelines of this case received the government subsidy unlawfully." Therefore, the grounds for termination of each entrusted operation agreement of this case are recognized as the grounds for termination of each entrusted operation agreement of this case. Thus, each of the entrusted operation agreements of this case was lawfully terminated (in addition, the number of the defendants who made the false referral of this case was 152, and the illegal payment of the expenses for the entrusted operation of the above internship was not appropriate for the case where the "the grounds for termination of the entrusted operation agreement of this case" of this case to Article 12 of the entrusted operation agreement of this case to Article 11 of the 2012 or Article 11 of the 2013 entrusted operation agreement of this case."

Therefore, under the premise that each of the entrusted operation agreements of this case is not terminated, the plaintiff's assertion that the refund of the money constitutes unjust enrichment is without merit, since the plaintiff has the right to claim the payment of entrusted operation expenses and the payment of job bonus.

2) Determination on the assertion regarding remuneration for delegated affairs

A) Whether the right to demand remuneration for delegated affairs is recognized

(1) The contract is terminated as a result of the obligor’s failure to manage the delegated affairs any longer due to the fiduciary relationship arising out of the obligor’s fault during the delegated affairs processing process. Even if the mandatory is obligated to pay reasonable remuneration and reasonable cost of administrative affairs recognized as reasonable in consideration of various circumstances, such as the degree and difficulty of the affairs performed by the mandatory at the time of the termination of the contract, degree of efforts made by the mandatory to handle the affairs, degree of the mandatory’s effort to handle the affairs, and the interests of the delegating person with respect to the entrusted affairs, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Da32460, Dec. 11, 2008; 2010Da52584, Jun. 14, 2012);

(2) Each of the instant consignment management agreements has the nature of a delegation contract under Article 680 of the Civil Act under a contract under which the head of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency entrusts the Plaintiff with the performance of the instant business affairs.

In the implementation guidelines of this case, 'VII. Government subsidies'. 6, etc., the implementation guidelines of this case stipulate that 30,000 won per intern employed by the implementing company should be calculated and paid for the entrusted operation expenses. 'VII. Government subsidies' 'the implementation guidelines of this case '5. Government subsidies' 'the implementation guidelines of this case '5. 'the Government subsidies' 'the implementation guidelines of this case 'the implementation guidelines of this case 2012 'the government subsidies' 'the government subsidies' 'the implementation guidelines of this case 'the implementation guidelines V. 'the government subsidies' 'the implementation guidelines of this case 'the implementation guidelines of this case 2012 'the government subsidies' shall be paid to the operating agency for 50,000 won per person for those who have worked for more than one month after the full-time conversion from among the employees. Therefore

Therefore, there is no special circumstance that the above consignment operation agreement of this case and the litigation delegation contract of this case are treated differently due to the termination of delegation contract, and in particular, the expenses for the handling of affairs can be claimed regardless of whether there is a cause attributable to the obligor (see Article 687 of the Civil Act). Thus, even if each of the instant consignment operation agreements was terminated due to the Plaintiff’s cause attributable to the Plaintiff, if the Plaintiff properly handled the business of this case before the termination of the above agreement, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff may be paid part of the consignment operation expenses and the job-seeking arrangement as the remuneration for the delegation (On the other hand, according to the notice of termination of each of the consignment operation agreement of this case, the termination date is September 29, 2014; the settlement date is the date when the head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office transferred the documents related to the business of this case from the Plaintiff on February 24, 2014.

(3) On the other hand, the defendant argues that the expenses for entrusted operation constitute subsidies under the Subsidy Management Act, and that there is no obligation to pay the expenses for entrusted operation to the plaintiff who committed an unlawful act pursuant to Articles 30(1) and 31-2(1) of the Subsidy Management Act. However, as seen earlier, it is reasonable to view the expenses for entrusted operation as remuneration or expenses paid for performing the entrusted business pursuant to each of the instant entrusted operation agreements. Therefore, it is difficult to regard them as subsidies under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Subsidy Management Act. Accordingly, the provisions, such as the revocation of subsidies under the Subsidy Management Act, cannot be

B) The part concerning the entrusted operation expenses and the remuneration for employment of the internship employed through the fraudulent arrangement of this case

Considering the aforementioned facts and the following circumstances, considering the overall purport of the arguments as seen earlier, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have performed the instant business in relation to the internship employed through the instant false good offices in accordance with the entrusted operation agreement. Therefore, the Plaintiff is not entitled to receive the entrusted operation expenses and the amount of employment news reports regarding the internship employed through the instant false good offices as a delegation fee for the handling of business affairs.

(1) Section 3-2 of the instant 2012 Enforcement Guidelines provides for the requirements to directly select the internships, and Section 3-3 of the instant 2013 Enforcement Guidelines provides that a implementing company may directly select the internships, even if the requirements are met, only if the requirements are met with the approval of the Employment Center (Seoul Local Employment Agency). The Plaintiff not only failed to meet the requirements, but also allowed the implementing company to directly select the internships without the approval of the Employment Center.

(2) Under Articles 4 and 10 of the instant consignment management agreement, the Plaintiff, an operating agency, has a duty to guide and manage whether the implementing company complies with the guidelines for the instant implementation. The Plaintiff, beyond the deadline for performing the said guidance management duties, intended to assist the implementing company to unfairly receive the internship support, etc. by preparing and delivering false documents, such as being employed through the employment arrangement procedure for an intern beyond the deadline for performing the said guidance management duties.

(3) The instant project is aimed at providing young people having difficulties in employment with employment opportunities and arranging human resources suitable for small and medium enterprises having difficulties in job placement. As such, in order to promote employment of internships and full-time workers and ensure fairness and transparency in the process, the instant implementation guidelines, etc. require the operating agency to perform duties of arranging and mediating internships, and the operating agency and employment center to continuously guide and manage the implementing company. Therefore, even though the Plaintiff’s guidance and management of the implementing company falls under the core part of the instant project, the Plaintiff did not perform such duties at all. Furthermore, the Plaintiff committed the instant fraudulent arrangement by the implementing agency, and the head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency failed to properly guide and manage the implementing company to comply with the instant implementation guidelines. Accordingly, the purpose of the instant project was de factoizing.

C) The portion of the expenses for entrusted operation concerning the internship for which the first application for the payment of the internship support is not made

(1) Facts of recognition

(A) Terms and conditions of the Plaintiff’s work under each entrusted operation agreement of this case

① 이 사건 각 위탁운영 약정 제4조 등에 의하면, 이 사건 사업과 관련하여 원고가 수행하는 업무는 ㉮ 미취업 청년 및 중소기업 등에 대한 사업 안내 및 홍보, 인턴신청자 및 수요기업 조사 · 발굴 등 모집, ㉯ 인턴 희망자와 기업의 신청 접수 및 그 적격 여부 확인, ㉰. 실시기업에 대한 교육실시, ㉱ 인턴 희망자 및 인턴 채용희망 기업 등에 대한 상담 · 알선, ㉲ 인턴 신청자와 실시기업 간 인턴약정 체결 지원 및 인턴제 실시 지도·관리, ㉳ 실시기업에 대한 지원금(인턴지원금, 조기정규직 전환 장려금) 지급, ㉴ 실시기업의 인턴 정규직 채용 유도 및 인턴의 실시기업 적응지도 등 사후관리, ㉵ 실시기업의 부정수급 등 환수 업무 등이 있다(위 각 업무를 그 기호에 맞춰 이 사건 ○업무라 한다).

② 이 사건 ㉳업무인 실시기업에 대한 인턴지원금 지급 업무의 구체적 내용은 실시기업에 대한 인턴지원금 신청 안내, 인턴지원금 신청서류 접수, 제반서류의 형식적 요건 구비 여부 확인 및 기존 인턴지원협약서와의 내용 비교, 고용정보 가입망을 통한 고용보험가입 여부 등의 조회, 인턴의 실근무 여부를 확인하기 위한 실시기업에 대한 실사, 지급 요건을 모두 구비한 실시기업에 대한 인턴지원금 지급 등이다.

(B) Details of the Plaintiff’s business conducted after the instant investigation

① After initiating the instant investigation, the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency requested the Plaintiff to suspend the duties to pay internship subsidies under each of the instant consignment management agreements. On February 24, 2014, the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency requested the Plaintiff to submit all documents related to the duties performed under each of the instant consignment management agreements. The Plaintiff submitted relevant documents to the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency on the same day upon the said request.

② Even after the submission of the relevant documents, the Plaintiff received an application for internship subsidies, etc. submitted by the implementing company pursuant to the entrusted operation agreement in 2013, and delivered the said application to the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office on several occasions.

③ After submitting relevant documents on February 24, 2014, the Plaintiff testified to the effect that “the duty to pay internship subsidies to the implementing company” performed by the Plaintiff, as of February 24, 2014, D, who was an employee of the Plaintiff, failed to conduct an actual inspection of the implementing company on or after February 24, 2014, and the employment information network at any time was prevented and could not be confirmed at any time. After February 24, 2014, the Plaintiff testified to the effect that the application for internship subsidies submitted by the implementing company was confirmed by confirming the formal requirements of the application for internship subsidies submitted by the implementing company, and submitted the application to the Seoul Regional Employment Agency only by comparing the existing agreement with the content thereof.”

④ Meanwhile, at the time of the investigation of the instant case, the Plaintiff’s six employees were totaled, and four of them were as of February 1, 2014; D were as of March 25, 2014; and the remaining one was as of April 1, 2014; and Plaintiff E remains and performed its duties.

① Under VI. Government subsidies, 30,000 won for each intern employed by the executing company shall be paid for the entrusted operation expenses, but if the intern has renounced while in active service, the expenses for entrusted operation shall be paid according to the actual working period. In addition, the settlement guidelines of this case provide that the amount calculated by multiplying 300,000 won by the ratio of 'the actual internship working period' compared to 'the actual internship working period' shall be paid for the entrusted operation expenses, and that the entrusted operation expenses for the intern who did not apply for the internship subsidies at least once shall not be paid for the entrusted operation expenses.

② According to the notice of refund of entrusted operation expenses, etc. of this case, the head of the Seoul Regional Labor Agency notified the Plaintiff of the fact that the Plaintiff was employed as a internship based on the instant settlement guidelines, but the Plaintiff failed to perform the first application for the internship subsidy, thereby failing to meet the requirements for the payment of entrusted operation expenses. The foregoing 438 persons are also included in the number of internships who delivered the application for the internship subsidy to the Seoul Regional Labor Agency after February 24, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 6, 8, 24, 26, 27, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 22, 23, and 26, witness D, and F's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

(2) Determination

(A) According to the above facts, the plaintiff is deemed to have performed part of the business of this case or E and the business of this case in relation to the "anton who was employed as the intern, but for whom the first application for the payment of the internship was not performed," and there is no circumstance to deem that the plaintiff violated each of the entrusted operation agreements of this case and the execution guidelines of this case in the course of performing such business. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to receive part of the entrusted operation expenses concerning "anton who did not perform the duties of the first application for the payment of the internship subsidy as the remuneration for the management

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the defendant does not pay the expenses for entrusted operation with respect to "the internship for which the initial application for the payment of the internship subsidy was not made" under the settlement guidelines of this case. Thus, the defendant does not have an obligation to pay the expenses for entrusted operation to the plaintiff. However, Article 18 of each of the entrusted operation agreements of this case stipulates that the matters not specified in the above agreement shall comply with the implementation guidelines of this case, etc., and there is no ground to view that the settlement guidelines of this case are included in the contents of each of the entrusted operation agreements of this case. Even if the settlement guidelines of this case are included in the contents of each of the entrusted operation agreements of this case, it is reasonable to pay the expenses for the entrusted operation regardless of the completion of the entrusted affairs, so it is reasonable to pay the expenses for the entrusted affairs

(B) In the event that each of the instant consignment operation agreements is not terminated and the Plaintiff performed normally the remaining duties under the terms and conditions of each of the instant consignment operation agreements, there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff could have been paid for the expenses for the consignment operation with respect to 429 persons out of the 'an intern's first application for the payment of the subsidies as shown in the attached Table 2. Furthermore, this study examines the specific amount of the expenses for the consignment operation with respect to 429 persons, who could have been paid when the Plaintiff performed the remaining duties under the agreement of each of the instant consignment operation. The Plaintiff asserted that the expenses for the consignment operation should not be calculated according to the ratio of the 'the working period of the internship' to the 'the working period of the internship'. However, Article 18 of each of the instant consignment operation agreements provide that the matters not specified in the above agreement should comply with the implementation guidelines of this case, and that the Plaintiff's assertion that the expenses for the consignment operation should be paid for each of the above 300,000 won per capita.

Therefore, according to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 28 and Eul evidence Nos. 28 and Eul evidence No. 28, the entrusted operation expenses for the above 429 internships calculated according to the ratio of "the actual internship service period" to "the internship service period" is KRW 103,127,863, such as the attached Table No. 2. Thus, the entrusted operation expenses for the above 429 interns, which could have been paid when the plaintiff performed the remaining duties under each of the above consignment management agreements of this case, are KRW 103,127,863.

(C) We examine the specific amount of remuneration to be paid by the Plaintiff. In full view of the facts acknowledged earlier and the overall purport of the arguments, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the degree and difficulty of the Plaintiff’s work performed until the termination of each of the instant consignment operation agreements; (b) the degree of efforts made by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff; (c) the number of the Plaintiff’s employees employed after the commencement of the instant investigation; and (d) the process of the termination of each of the instant consignment operation agreements, it is reasonable to determine that the reasonable amount of remuneration for performing the work performed until the termination of each of the instant consignment operation agreements for 429, 103, 127,863,

① On February 24, 2014, 429, the Plaintiff included the application documents for the internship support in the field of 429 “an intern for which the first application for the internship support is not performed.” However, the Plaintiff’s duties related to the application for the internship support that was performed after February 24, 2014 are merely submitted after simply reviewing the formal requirements of the application, and it is not sufficiently confirmed whether the Plaintiff satisfies the substantive requirements for the internship support, such as inquiry into whether to purchase employment insurance, and verification of the executing company, etc... In short, it is difficult to evaluate that the Plaintiff actually performed the instant E business (the duties of paying the internship support for the implementing company) related to 429 “an intern for which the first application for the internship support is not performed.”

② In addition, with respect to 429 "an intern for which the first application for the payment of the internship subsidy was not performed, the Plaintiff did not perform not only the marina business in this case, but also the instant 4 and arche business. The project in this case can achieve the purpose of the project only by deciding whether a implementing company was employed as an intern through post-post, continuous guidance and supervision, not by making it possible to secure substantial work experience, preventing the implementation company from unjust receipt of the internship subsidy, and encouraging the implementation company to employ a full-time intern.

Thus, although the internal or foreign business of this case is subject to ex post facto and continuous guidance and supervision of the operating company, the plaintiff did not perform this part of the business.

(D) Therefore, the Plaintiff has the right to receive 61,876,718 won (=103,127,863 X60/100, less than KRW 60/100) due to the remuneration for delegated affairs of the instant project relating to 429 U.S. 429.

3) Sub-committee

Therefore, the Defendant arbitrarily returned KRW 61,876,718, which the Plaintiff has the right to be reasonably paid. As such, the aforementioned refund constitutes the amount acquired without any legal cause, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff 61,876,718, and delay damages therefor. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 61,876,718, and to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act, from February 25, 2017, the day following the delivery date of the copy of the complaint in this case, where it is deemed reasonable for the Defendant to resist the existence or scope of the obligation to pay to the Plaintiff from February 25, 2017 to October 5, 2018, which is the date of the ruling in this case, and from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges

Judgment of the presiding judge;

Judges Slocks

Judges Kang Jae-sung

Note tin

(i) 20,061,580 U.S./ 78 U.S./ 2012 employment for the 2012 U.S./ 48 U.S./ 2012 where the good offices are omitted;

2,400,000 won + 20,571,630 won for entrusted operation expenses in 2013 20,571,630 + the first application for payment of internship subsidies.

131,400,000 won for the entrusted operation expenses of 2013,000,000,000,000, not

2) The notice of the refund of the instant entrusted operation expenses, etc. is 438 U.S. employees who did not perform the first application for the payment of the internship subsidy.

However, the defendant cannot be eligible for the expenses for entrusted operation even if he/she performed affairs normally, such as not being subscribed to employment insurance.

The plaintiff asserts that nine internships are included, and the plaintiff also has the ordinary duty to apply for the payment of internship subsidies, etc. in accordance with the defendant's argument.

In the event of the performance of the entrusted operation expenses, the list of the settlement of the entrusted operation expenses (Evidence A 28) was shipped on the premise that the internship eligible for the entrusted operation expenses is 429 persons.

(c)

Attached Form

A person shall be appointed.