beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is an agricultural partnership with the aim of promoting the increase in the income and the improvement of the welfare of its members by securing markets for the tea industry and improving agricultural productivity.
B. A subsidy grant 1) On October 24, 2008, the Defendant selected the Plaintiff as a recipient of “B” project, which is a private city subsidized project, and granted KRW 100,000,000 to the Plaintiff. 2) On November 27, 2009, the Defendant selected the Plaintiff as a recipient of “C Project,” which is a private city subsidized project, and granted KRW 750,00,000 to the Plaintiff.
3) On October 10, 2014, the Defendant selected the Plaintiff as the object of “D business”, which is a subsidized business in Scheon City, and granted subsidies of KRW 125,00,00 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant subsidies”). C. The Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment of KRW 125,00,00 to the Plaintiff on August 10, 201, for fraud and violation of the Subsidy Management Act, by the Changwon District Court Decision 2016Da3648 decided August 10, 2017, the Plaintiff’s previous, incumbent representative director, E, and F were subject to a suspended sentence of KRW 125,00.
E and F appealed (C. 2017No2429 of Changwon District Court Decision 2017No2429) on November 30, 2017, each of the above crimes was sentenced to imprisonment of 1 and 2 years of suspended execution, and F was sentenced to imprisonment of 1 and 2 years of suspended execution and 2 years of suspended execution, and the judgment was finalized on December 8, 2017.
2) On May 17, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition to notify the Plaintiff of the amount of the refund of the subsidy due to the violation of the statutes as indicated below (hereinafter “instant disposition 1”). C3) On May 18, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition to notify the Plaintiff of the amount of the refund of the subsidy due to the violation of the statutes as indicated below.
(hereinafter “instant Disposition 2,” and “each of the instant dispositions,” in addition to the instant Disposition 1, BD
D. On June 5, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Standing Committee for Administrative Appeals (Seoul-do), but on July 24, 2018.