(영문) 서울고등법원 2012.12.6. 선고 2012누7341 판결

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The defendant's refusal to pay a new employment promotion subsidy to the plaintiff on October 6, 2010 and the order to return KRW 2,92,580 shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Acknowledgement of the first instance judgment

The reasoning for this Court concerning this case is as follows: (a) the second fifth day of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as the second day of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the second day is added as the second day of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) the second day of the judgment is added as the ground for the judgment of the court of first instance; and (c) thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the

2. Additional determination

The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case violates the principle of excessive prohibition and the principle of proportionality.

However, according to the facts acknowledged by the first instance judgment cited earlier, the Plaintiff may be deemed to have dismissed the employee B according to the business needs of the Plaintiff. Thus, even if the Plaintiff newly employed the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff cannot receive a new employment promotion subsidy under Article 23 of the Employment Insurance Act and Article 26 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Employment Insurance Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22026, Feb. 8, 2010). Therefore, the instant disposition refusing to pay a new employment promotion subsidy and ordering the return of a new employment promotion subsidy already paid does not violate the excessive prohibition or proportionality. The Plaintiff’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just with this conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.