1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

1. The reason why the court is to use this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this case is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The grounds for use of the instant disposition by the court as to the instant case are as stated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the Plaintiff’s addition of the following judgments to the pertinent part as to the contents asserted in the trial. Thus, the reasoning for use of the instant disposition is as follows.

【Additional Judgment Matters】

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The person who committed the instant violation is not the Plaintiff but E. The Plaintiff is not the subject of the instant violation, and the Plaintiff cannot take the instant disposition against the Plaintiff. 2) The Plaintiff was unaware of the fact that E did not commit the instant violation.

Therefore, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have intention or gross negligence.

3) The purpose of this case’s violation is not the parents of infants, but the guardians of infants. In such a case, Article 46 subparag. 1(d) of the Infant Care Act cannot be seen as falling under Article 46 subparag. 1(d) of the Infant Care Act. (2) of the Infant Care Act provides that “The purpose of this Act is to contribute to the promotion of the welfare of infants and their families by providing that “The economic and social activities of guardians are related to the promotion of the welfare of infants and their families by protecting infants and providing sound education on their mind and body, and by facilitating their guardians’ economic and social activities.”

According to the purport of Article 1 of the Infant Care Act, in light of the language and text of Article 46 subparagraph 1 (d) of the Infant Care Act, the head of the child care center shall directly and indirectly inflict economic damage on the guardian of the infant by intention or negligence.