1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for cancellation of the disposition of restitution of unjust enrichment shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 1, 2016, the Plaintiff was designated as a B social enterprise by the Governor of Gangwon-do (Public Notice of Gangwon-do), and accordingly, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant on August 10, 2016 to support the job creation of a social enterprise, and received some subsidies for the job creation of a social enterprise from September 2016 to June 2017.

B. On August 2, 2017, the Defendant confirmed that five (5) employees of the Plaintiff were working at the E-company located in Dart, and filed a complaint with the investigative agency on the ground that the Plaintiff was receiving subsidies by false or other unlawful means, after having falsely re-registered five (5) employees of the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff’s employees.

C. On October 16, 2017, the Defendant issued a pre-announcement of administrative dispositions on November 2, 2017 with respect to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant Disposition 1”), and issued a disposition of termination of the agreement on the financial support project (job creation support, project development cost, facility cost), and permanent exclusion (hereinafter “instant Disposition”) with respect to the Plaintiff. The Defendant issued a disposition of restitution of KRW 46,842,90 (hereinafter “instant Disposition 2”).

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal disputing the instant disposition Nos. 1 and 2 with the Gangwon-do Administrative Appeals Commission on February 20, 2018. However, the Gangwon-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on April 30, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, and 5, entry of Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 12, 14 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the claim for revocation of the disposition of unlawful restitution amount among the lawsuit of this case

A. Article 18(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act provides that “a revocation lawsuit may be brought without going through an administrative appeal against the pertinent disposition pursuant to the provisions of the law, even if it is possible to bring an administrative appeal against the pertinent disposition.”

, however, that such other Act is applicable.