beta
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 the representative and the president of the C Child Care Center (hereinafter “C Child Care Center”) located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, and D is the infant care teacher working for the Child Care Center and the Plaintiff.
B. According to the guidance for the project of the Do government project and the support plan for the welfare expenses of the Do government in Chungcheongnam-do based on Article 36 of the Infant Care Act and Article 24 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, if requested by the head of the Do government, the defendant shall, after reviewing the application, deposit and pay the improvement expenses, long-term continuous service allowances and welfare expenses (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "each of the subsidies of this case") into the personal account of the Do government, and the infant care teacher who has given leave or has given leave for more than one month due to childbirth, etc.
C. From February 25, 2018 to May 24, 2019, D had been granted temporary retirement and temporary retirement before childbirth, and the Plaintiff applied for the payment of each of the instant subsidies to D (hereinafter “each of the instant applications”) to the Defendant during the aforementioned period from March 2018 to April 2019. Accordingly, the Defendant paid the Defendant totaling KRW 420,000 won of the long-term continuous service allowances (monthly KRW 30,000), total sum of 8,40,000 won of the improvement expenses (monthly KRW 60,000,000,000,000 won of welfare expenses (from March 25, 2018 to February 1, 2019) as accounts in the name of D during the said period.
C. On November 4, 2019, the Defendant issued an order to return a subsidy of KRW 2.460,000 pursuant to Article 40 subparagraph 3 of the Infant Care Act, ② Articles 45(1)1 and 45-2 of the Infant Care Act, Article 25-4 and [Attachment Table 1-4] of the Enforcement Decree of the Infant Care Act, and Article 38(1) and [Attachment Table 9] of the Enforcement Rule of the Infant Care Act, on the ground that “the Plaintiff applied for a subsidy to childcare teacher D who is on leave of absence and received a subsidy by fraudulent or other illegal means.”