1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff is a person who operates the “C” (hereinafter referred to as the “instant childcare center”) in Seopopopo City B.

Pursuant to Article 30 of the Infant Care Act, the Defendant: (a) performed evaluation certification on June 1, 201 with the effective period as of May 31, 2014; and (b) performed re-certification on May 30, 2014 with the effective period from June 1, 2014 to June 14, 2017.

On December 17, 2014, the Jeju Special Self-Governing Province Provincial Police Agency notified that the childcare center of this case was suspected of being in office as a childcare teacher of the childcare center of this case and that E would be sent as a prosecution opinion and requested to take measures such as administrative disposition.

On December 22, 2014, the aforementioned D and E were indicted as charges of violating the Child Welfare Act that “from June 2, 2014 to July 18, 2014, the indictment was changed to 22 times (D 15 times, E7 times) the total amount of 71 times [the indictment was changed to 22 times thereafter)] from June 2, 2014 to July 18, 2014.”

On January 28, 2015, the Defendant notified by the Jeju Do Governor of the occurrence of the cause for revocation of the accreditation of the instant childcare center on March 19, 2015, the Defendant revoked the accreditation of the instant childcare center retroactively from December 17, 2014 pursuant to Article 30(5)4 of the Infant Care Act and Article 32-2(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, on the ground that “The suspicion of violating the Child Welfare Act, such as physical and emotional abuse, is recognized as a result of the investigation into the instant childcare center” on March 19, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). D and E led to confessioning the facts charged on the date of trial. On June 4, 2015, the Jeju District Court rendered a judgment that the act of D and E constituted physical and emotional abuse and recognized the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act, but suspended the sentence of fine of KRW 1 million by taking into account the circumstances such as the background of the act of abuse, D, age and character and conduct of E, while recognizing the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act.

Jeju District Court.