beta
Text
1.The judgment of the first instance, including any claims added by this Court, shall be modified as follows:
The lawsuit of this case.
Reasons
Details of the disposition
The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the first instance court is as follows: “The Director of the Health Insurance Review Board was requested” No. 15 of the judgment of the first instance court, and “The Director of the Health Insurance Review Board conducted an on-site investigation of the instant hospital specialized for the elderly and the instant hospital (hereinafter “the first on-site investigation”) from September 8, 2016 to September 9 of the same month; and the Minister of Health and Welfare from December 5, 2016 to September 13, 2016 to the instant hospital specialized for the elderly and the instant hospital (the period subject to the investigation: from October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2016; hereinafter “the second on-site investigation”). The second on-site No. 8 of the judgment of the first instance court added “No. 1 through 3” to “No. 1 through 5,” and the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance court (Article 9 through 40 of the Administrative Litigation Act).
Of the 2nd claim as to the part of the instant lawsuit, Defendant Corporation’s claim seeking confirmation of invalidity of the medical care benefit restitution disposition as of July 10, 2017 among the 2nd claim, and Defendant Corporation’s claim for revocation of the medical care benefit restitution disposition as of July 10, 2017 among the 2nd claim, and Defendant Corporation’s claim for the second ancillary claim, as of July 10, 2017, Defendant Corporation’s notice of payment (the instant notice of payment) as of July 10, 2017 was merely a demand for payment as to the amount not treated by electronic offset among the amount recovered as of July 10, 2017. Thus, it cannot be viewed as a separate disposition independent of the instant
Therefore, the second main claim seeking confirmation of invalidity and the second preliminary claim seeking revocation of the instant payment notice, among the instant lawsuits, is unlawful, since they are subject to acts that cannot be subject to an appeal litigation.
Part I of the preliminary claim seeking the revocation of the first disposition of this case.