1. On December 16, 2014, the Defendant’s disposition to suspend the business of the B medical care center for 87 days against the Plaintiff is revoked.

2. The plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From March 1, 2012, the Plaintiff operated “C Care Center”, a long-term care institution, on the fourth floor of the D Building in Ansan-gu, Ansan-si, and “B Care Center,” a long-term care institution, on the fifth floor of the said building. C Care Center and B Care Center (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant medical care centers”) were nine persons each from the time of the opening of the hospital.

B. From August 19, 2014, the Defendant conducted an on-site investigation on the details of long-term care benefits of each of the instant medical care centers for four days, and confirmed that the Plaintiff unfairly claimed expenses for long-term care benefits by adding the number of persons who were admitted to each of the instant medical care centers, without reducing the number of employees exceeding the maximum number of employees, even if the Plaintiff admitted those exceeding the maximum number of each of the aforementioned medical care centers.

C. On December 16, 2014, the Defendant: (a) Article 37(1)4 of the Act on Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged; and Article 28 [Attachment Table 2] of the Enforcement Rule of the said Act

C. (1) Pursuant to paragraph (1), 102 days of business suspension for C Medical Care Center and 87 days of business suspension for B Medical Care Center (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions”).

(D) The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the Plaintiff, but the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the appeal on April 8, 2015. [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (which includes a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply).

each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Each disposition of the instant case stated the grounds for the disposition as “the violation of the fixed number excess standard, the violation of the criteria for additional placement of human resources, and the claim without deducting the subscription period for liability insurance,” but the factual basis and the grounds for calculating the period of suspension of business are not specified in detail. Therefore, each disposition of the instant case is procedural errors. 2) E is a F’s wife who received facility benefits by entering the C Care Center.