logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.03.27 2019누59396
요양급여비용환수결정처분 취소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition or dismissal under the following and subsequent determination under paragraph (2). Thus, this shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The third through Twelve of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows.

“1) The grounds for the original disposition and the basic facts identical to the Defendant’s assertion are added to the following grounds.

In violation of Article 33(2) of the Medical Service Act, E, a non-medical person, who is unable to establish a medical institution, established the instant hospital.

The instant hospital violated Article 33(4) of the Medical Service Act, since it obtained permission for establishment in the name of the Plaintiff other than the actual founder.

[Attachment 14 to 18 of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows. A) The defendant presented only the violation of Article 4(2) and Article 33(8) of the Medical Service Act at the time of the disposition in this case, and added the grounds for the disposition in violation of Article 33(2) of the Medical Service Act at the time of the closure of pleadings in the first instance trial, and added the grounds for the disposition in violation of Article 33(4) of the Medical Service Act at the time of the first instance trial. (B) In an appeal litigation seeking the revocation of administrative disposition, the disposition authority can add or change other grounds only to the extent that the grounds for the initial disposition are recognized to be identical. The identity of the basic facts in this case is determined by taking into account the specific facts prior to the evaluation of the grounds for disposition law, and whether the basic facts are identical in this case is identical to the basic social facts, which are the basis of the disposition law, and the parties have been aware of the fact that the additional or modified grounds were not specified at the time of the disposition.

(b) have the identity of the original reason for the action.

arrow