1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal shall be the first instance.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court for the acceptance of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the first instance, except for the dismissal of the Plaintiff or the addition of the judgment on the Plaintiff’s new assertion, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Article 15(1) of the Framework Act on Administrative Investigations provides that “The head of an administrative agency who has conducted a regular or occasional investigation pursuant to Article 7 shall not re-examine the same person subject to the same investigation with respect to the same matter.” Article 15(2) of the Framework Act on Administrative Investigations provides that “The head of an administrative agency who has conducted a regular or occasional investigation pursuant to Article 7 shall not re-examine the same person subject to the same investigation.”

Provided, That the same shall not apply where the relevant administrative agency has secured new evidence suspected of committing an illegal act against a person subject to investigation already investigated.

“......”

The evidence Nos. 19, 20, 24, 25, and 27 included the following circumstances, namely, ① some of the periods subject to the investigation of the instant field investigation (from August 2017 to February 2018) included the period subject to the investigation of the previous field investigation; ② E worked as a cook at the instant medical care center, and was registered as a medical care care worker from July 2018, which was after the previous on-site investigation and investigation period; ② F had not worked as the instant medical care center during the previous on-site investigation and investigation period; ③ the Defendant received a new report on the instant medical care center on August 27, 2018, which was after the previous on-site investigation and investigation period; ③ the Defendant accordingly received a new unfair claim for the instant medical care center on August 27, 2018.