1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, such as admitting the judgment, is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except to supplement or add the judgment as follows 2. Thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article

2. Supplement and addition of judgments;

A. The Plaintiff asserts that C is a caregiver who is registered as a caregiver at night (21:00 - 09:00) and is required to perform a caregiver’s duties, such as taking care of or regulating the elderly who are moving to or moving to open, and thus C is a caregiver employed by the Medical Care Center of this case.

As recognized in the judgment of the first instance, which is cited by the court of this Court, it is reasonable to deem C to have performed the duties as a manager of a caregiver from 21:00 to 09:00 of the original working hours during the pertinent medical care center from October 2013 to April 2015. Even if C performed the duties as a caregiver after the original working hours, C cannot be deemed to have performed the duties as a caregiver working at the instant medical care center since its working hours do not exceed 2 to 3 hours a day.

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff also asserts that the preparation of meals and the provision of meals are the primary duties of caregivers, so D et al. is also in exclusive charge of cooking duties.

Considering the purport, language, etc. of the Welfare of Older Persons Act, as recognized by the first instance judgment cited by this court, it is reasonable to view that the duties of cooking food for persons admitted to medical welfare facilities for older persons are not the duties of “liter” as well as the duties of “diter” in place of cooking food for older persons.

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

C. Furthermore, since the details of expenses for long-term care benefits are not set in personnel expenses, the Plaintiff was in charge of cooking.