logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.10.27 2016구합51072
업무정지
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;

A. The Plaintiff is operating a long-term care institution (long-term care communal home for older persons) (hereinafter “instant medical care center”) under the trade name “C” in Kimpo-si B and 208 Dong 1302 (hereinafter “C”).

B. From March 3, 2015 to March 6, 2015, the Defendant conducted an on-site investigation on the details of benefits from March 3, 2015 to January 2015, 2015, and determined that “D exempted co-payment for profit-making purposes from July 2014 to August 2014.”

C. On May 13, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition to suspend the business of the instant medical care center for one month pursuant to Article 37(1) of the former Long-Term Care Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 13647, Dec. 29, 2015) against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1, Gap 2's each entry, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's summary of the plaintiff's assertion (1) received all money equivalent to the amount of co-payment from D, and the certificate submitted by E is written and signed by E as it is, in the course of a field investigation, written in advance by coercion.

(2) Since D, a parent of the caregiver F, was admitted to the instant medical care center, and even though the Plaintiff demanded F to pay co-payment, F did not pay co-payment for the purpose of profit-making, the Plaintiff did not reduce or exempt co-payment for the purpose of profit-making.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. In full view of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff exempted D’s co-payment for the purpose of profit-making by comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned facts acknowledged, as well as the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in the above-mentioned facts, A3, A4, B2, and B-3.

① The Plaintiff received the full amount equivalent to the amount of co-payment to be paid by D.

arrow