beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition and the progress of the previous revocation lawsuit;
A. The Plaintiff is a company running the manufacturing and wholesale and retail business of automobile parts in the Young-si, Seocheon-gu, Busan, and C is the representative director of the Plaintiff.
B. After filing a report on a plan for employment maintenance measures (suspension of business) with the Defendant, the Plaintiff was supported by the employment maintenance support payment for D from April 2009 to June 2009 for three times from June 11, 2009 to July 22, 2009 (=65,743 won as of April 2009 + 67,602 won as of May 2009 + 65,743 won as of June 2009 + 65,743 won as of June 2009).
C. On July 4, 2011, the Defendant issued an order to return KRW 1,989,088 of the illegally received amount of employment maintenance support payment (suspension) to the Plaintiff, 9,945,40 won (= KRW 1,989,08 x 5 x 5) for one year (from June 11, 2009 to July 21, 201) for additional collection and decision to grant various subsidies under the Employment Insurance Act, and for one year (from July 21, 2010 to July 21, 2010) for payment restriction under the Employment Insurance Act.
On March 5, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on March 5, 2012, and the Central Administrative Appeals Commission revoked the portion in excess of KRW 6,623,07 [2 times per April 65,743 x 3 times) + (67,602 won per May 6, 201 x (65,743 won x 5 times per June 65,743 x 5 times) and dismissed the remainder of the Plaintiff’s claim.
E. On March 12, 2012, the Defendant issued an order to return KRW 1,989,088 in total, and issued an additional collection of KRW 6,623,007 (two to five times the amount of unlawful receipt) to the Plaintiff by reducing only the amount additionally collected among the dispositions listed in the above paragraph (c) upon the said ruling.
(F) The Plaintiff sought the revocation of the instant disposition against the Defendant on May 21, 2012, including the dispositions in the foregoing paragraphs (c) and (e).