logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2019.09.19 2019구합5583
시정명령처분 취소 등 청구의 소
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates C Child Care Center (hereinafter “C Child Care Center”) in Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si.

B. On February 22, 2019, the Defendant issued the instant corrective order, “instant subsidy return disposition,” “the instant disposition,” “the instant disposition,” “the instant subsidy return disposition,” “the instant disposition,” “the instant disposition,” “the instant disposition,” “the instant disposition,” “the instant disposition,” and “the instant disposition,” and “the instant order for closure of childcare center (hereinafter referred to as “instant order for closure”) on the grounds that “the Plaintiff conspired with D and E, and the Plaintiff, in fact, carried out the duties of childcare teachers to F without the qualifications of childcare teachers, and received subsidies, such as basic childcare fees, based on which the Plaintiff was denied.”

Details of administrative disposition - Violation of standards for placement of infant care teachers and staff - Report on false appointment or dismissal - Details of an administrative disposition for illegal receipt of subsidies - comply with reporting on compliance with the standards for placement of infant care teachers and staff - Refund of subsidies: 11,321,320 won - Suspension of qualification for the president from April 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020 - Closure of facilities: Date of closure of facilities: Article 44 subparagraph 3, 3-2, 46 subparagraph 4, 40 subparagraph 3, and 45 (1) 1 of the Infant Care Act, which is the ground for disposition, shall be the date of closure.

C. Meanwhile, on August 16, 2018, the Plaintiff was issued a summary order of KRW 7,000,000 on the grounds that the Plaintiff violated the Subsidy Budget and Management Act by 2018 High Court Decision 5553 on August 16, 2018.

Criminal facts

The defendant (the plaintiff is referred to as the plaintiff; hereinafter the same shall apply) is the director of the child care center of this case located in B in the Dong-si, Cheongju-si, and F is the person who works as the child care teacher of the G of the child care center of this case without qualifications as the child care teacher, and E and D is the person

1. The head of a nursery school who violates the Infant Care Act (Prohibition of Lending the name);

arrow