1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs taxi transport business, etc.

B. On April 18, 2014, the Plaintiff prepared the rules of employment as of February 1, 2012, stating that the retirement age was extended from 60 to 63 years of age, and submitted it to the Defendant on May 12, 2014, and applied for subsidies for extension of employment of elderly citizens from the quarter of September 22, 2014 and the quarter of October 7, 2014 to the third quarter of 2014.

C. Accordingly, on October 7, 2014 and October 29, 2014, the Plaintiff received KRW 54,000,000 in total from the Defendant for extension of employment of the elderly from the first quarter of 2012 to the third quarter of 2014 as follows (hereinafter “instant subsidies”).

Serial 1st quarter of 2012 60,00,000 on the date of the payment of subsidies for the relevant quarter 1st quarter of 2012 2,40,000 on October 7, 2014 3st quarter of 2012 3,60,000,504 quarter of 2012 4,500,000 on April quarter of 2012 4, 2013 5,500,006 5,40,400,007 5,40,000,000 for the second quarter of 2 quarter of 2013, 200,008 6,60,000,000 quarterly of 2 quarter of 20,009, 2014 quarter of 20, 2014, 2014;

D. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s representative director B, in collusion with C, etc. of the additional labor law firm, did not extend the Plaintiff’s workplace retirement age from 60 to 63 years of age on February 1, 2012, and even if the retirement age was 60 years of age, if the Plaintiff had extended the retirement age from 60 to 63 years of age on February 1, 2012, the Plaintiff’s employment rules were falsely made the Plaintiff’s retirement age at 63 years of age, and the Plaintiff’s employment rules and retirement age that was falsely made on February 1, 2012, which was 63 years of age when filing an application for the above subsidies, were submitted along with the Plaintiff’s employment rules and the Plaintiff’s employment rules on February 1, 2012 from the Defendant by submitting the Plaintiff’s employment rules on June 30, 2010.

On January 28, 2015, the court was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 months for a violation of the Act on the Management of Fraud and Subsidy, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on the following grounds: (a) the total amount of the subsidies for extension of employment of the elderly was 54,00,000 won in total twice as stated in the paragraph; (b) the Defendant was indicted for a crime

E. Meanwhile, on the other hand.