logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.05.30 2017구합20219
장기요양급여비용 환수처분 취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is operating the “C Long-Term Care Center for the Aged” (hereinafter “instant facility”) under the former Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged (long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged) under the Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged (Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged) (amended by Act No. 13647, Dec. 29, 2015; hereinafter “Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged”).

B. As a result of an on-site investigation of the instant facilities (the period subject to investigation: the total of 25 months from August 31, 2014 to August 3, 2016) conducted from October 31, 2016 to November 3, 2016, the Defendant discovered the fact that the Defendant received additional placement of human resources and additional placement of necessary human resources, even though it fails to meet the monthly standard working hours (number of working days x 8 hours) by performing the caregiver’s duties for three months from January 2015 to March 2015.

C. Accordingly, on December 26, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition to recover KRW 9,201,940 from the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 43(1)3 of the Act on Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 3 through 5 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 is a long-term care institution for home care providing protection during home care benefits, and the criteria for placement of human resources for caregivers under Article 24(2)1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged Act and attached Table 9 of the Enforcement Rule of the Welfare of the Aged Act are “not less than one user per seven users.” The literal interpretation requires one caregiver only when the number of users of the facility providing home care services becomes seven, and the number of users becomes 14.

arrow