2012Nu1783 Revocation of orders to refund workplace skill development training expenses

Samup Holdings Co., Ltd. (trade name prior to the change: Samyang Co., Ltd.)

A person shall be appointed.

Daejeon District Court Decision 201Guhap546 Decided July 4, 2012

December 26, 2013

January 6, 2014

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

3. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendant (Appointed Party).

1. Purport of claim

For the plaintiff:

(a) KRW 1,913,260 per the defendant (appointed party; hereinafter referred to as the defendant only) 1,913,260 per each of the following dates:

(b) the Commissioner of the Local Employment and Labor Administration of the Central District Office among the selected persons: KRW 152,150 on October 28, 201;

(c) 1,004,950 won 1,004,950 won decided by the head of the Ulsan Regional Employment and Labor Office on October 2, 201;

(d) Appointers Gwangju Regional Employment and Labor Office Head of the Gu on October 20, 201 16,930 won on October 20, 201;

(e) revoke each order of return of KRW 637,874 issued by the Director of the Jeonju District Office of Gwangju Regional Employment and Labor (201, 25 October 3).

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

1. Details of the disposition;

The reasoning for this part of this Court is as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

In full view of the purport of each of the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 7-1 through 6, the Constitutional Court held that Article 35 (1) of the former Employment Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 9315, Dec. 31, 2008) (amended by Act No. 9315, Nov. 8, 2013), which is a basis provision for each of the dispositions of this case, is unconstitutional. According to the defendant's decision that the defendant is unconstitutional since it violated the comprehensive delegation prohibition principle, the head of the Si/Gun/Gu Office within the jurisdiction of the National Labor Agency within the Ministry of Strategy and Finance among the selected parties, on Nov. 1, 2013, 2013; the head of the Si/Gun/Gu within the Busan Regional Labor Agency within the jurisdiction of the Busan Regional Labor Agency; the head of the Si/Gun/Gu within the jurisdiction of the Busan Regional Labor Agency, on Oct. 111, 2013; the head of Gu had already revoked each of the dispositions of this case.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus all of it is dismissed. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked and all of the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed. However, pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act, the total costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the

The presiding judge shall receive the award of merit;

Judges Excursion Ship Owners

Judges Doo-rayia

1) Although the Plaintiff sought the revocation of the disposition taken on October 31, 2011, the Plaintiff appears to be a clerical error in October 26, 2011.

2) Although the Plaintiff sought the revocation of the disposition taken on October 7, 2011, the Plaintiff appears to be a clerical error in October 6, 201.

3) Although the Plaintiff sought the revocation of the disposition taken on October 31, 2011, the Plaintiff appears to be a clerical error in October 25, 2011.

A person shall be appointed.