The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Daejeon High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Articles 31 and 32 of the former Act on the Promotion of Technology Innovation of Small and Medium Enterprises (amended by Act No. 11538, Dec. 11, 2012; Act No. 11538, Jun. 12, 2013) provide for “where the research and development result is very poor”, etc. as the grounds for restriction on participation in and recovery of contributions from projects for promoting technological innovation, etc., and delegates specific grounds for sanctions, disposition standards, etc. to Presidential Decree.

As a result of delegation, Articles 20 and 21 [Attachment 2] of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Promotion of Innovation of Small and Medium Enterprises (amended by Presidential Decree No. 24586, Jun. 11, 2013) provide that, where a small or medium enterprise owner, etc. who participated in a project for the promotion of technological innovation has conducted a research and development process unfaithfully and thus the result is extremely poor ( Subparagraph 1 (a)), the full restriction on participation in the above support project and the full recovery of contributions paid for three years, and “where the research and development process has been faithfully performed but the result is extremely poor ( Subparagraph 1 (c)),” the above support project’s restriction on participation shall be imposed for one year without the recovery of contributions (hereinafter “instant Enforcement Decree”).

In addition, considering the purport of imposing sanctions on the restriction on participation, the structure and content of the statutes on the recovery of contributions, and the fact that the enforcement decree of this case differs depending on the degree of sanctions depending on the degree of the performance of the research and development process even in cases where the research results are extremely poor, it shall be separately determined on the grounds of sanctions under the enforcement decree of this case, “indecent performance of the research and development process” and “in extremely poor research results,” and it shall not be presumed that the research results are extremely poor.

Furthermore, whether the research and development process is faithfully performed under the provisions of the Enforcement Decree of the instant case is the premise for research and development projects.