logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.08.09 2015구합21801
장기요양급여비용 환수처분 취소 청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition to recover expenses for long-term care benefits of KRW 33,527,00 against the Plaintiff on June 17, 2015 is revoked.

2...

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a non-profit corporation operating the “C Center”, which is a long-term care institution providing facility benefits, and a “C Center”, which is a long-term care institution providing visiting care, visiting bathing, and other home care benefits.

B. As a result, the Defendant conducted a field investigation on the Plaintiff’s long-term care institution (i.e., period subject to investigation: period from September 1, 2012 to February 28, 2015) jointly with Syang-si from April 13, 2015 to April 17, 2015, found the following matters to be discovered: (i) a non-acceptance of liability insurance; (ii) a violation of standards for placement of human resources; (iii) a violation of standards for additional placement of human resources; and (iv) a violation of standards for the use of vehicle bathing.

B Medical Care Costs

1. From July 12, 2012 to May 26, 2013, the Defendant claimed that the Defendant did not reduce the amount of the Corporation’s liability even though he/she purchased a liability insurance to be purchased as a caregiver who provided home care benefits.

2. A caregiver, who violated standards for placement of human resources, worked as a cook from around September 2012 to February 2013, and E, from around November 2013 to February 2015, filed a false report on working hours and filed a claim for the reduction of expenses for care, even though he/she violated the standards for placement of caregiver in January 2, 2014, January 2, 2014, February 2014, June 2014, June 2014, and November 11, 2015.

3. In cases where the Plaintiff calculated the amount of expenses for benefits in violation of the standards for additional placement and provisional placement of human resources, the Plaintiff filed a claim for expenses for benefits by adding the expenses for benefits on the premise that the additional placement and provisional placement of human resources was additionally placed in September, October, 2012, March, April, 2013, even though it did not apply to the calculation of the amount of expenses for benefits in violation of the standards for additional placement and provisional placement of human resources.

C Center

1. A cleaning agent in which the number of two visiting bathings is carried out, for the safety of the recipients in violation of the standards;

arrow