1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a social welfare foundation that operates a child protection and treatment facility under the name of “C” from August 16, 1986 to Kimhae-si B (hereinafter “instant facility”).

B. On June 3, 2014, three original students living in the instant facility (hereinafter “victims”) were sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for each crime (hereinafter “sexual crime of this case”) committed on eight occasions from July 2013 to December 28, 2012, using the state of resistance difficulties of D, a person with a intellectual disability living in the instant facility (hereinafter “victim”) in the Changwon District Court Decision 2014 Gowon District Court Decision 2014Ma9, 56 (Joint), 63 (Joint), 74 (Joint), and 99 (Joint).

(The above judgment became final and conclusive on November 13, 2014).

After undergoing the hearing procedure against the plaintiff on the ground that repeated collective sexual crimes occurred in the instant facility, the defendant market issued a disposition to revoke the permission to establish a social welfare foundation as of July 15, 2014 (hereinafter “instant one disposition”) pursuant to Article 26(1)6 of the Social Welfare Services Act on July 16, 2014. The defendant head of the Gu issued a disposition to order the plaintiff to close the instant facility on July 25, 2014 pursuant to Article 40(1)2 of the Social Welfare Services Act (hereinafter “instant two disposition”).

On the other hand, the plaintiff appealed to the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the plaintiff's request on September 18, 2014.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 5 (if there is a number, including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul’s 1, 4, 7, 8, Eul’s 8 through 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 constitutes the grounds for the instant disposition.