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 the president and the representative of Jeonju-si B apartment and C Child Care Center in 708 Dong 103 (hereinafter referred to as the "Child Care Center in this case").

The Plaintiff registered D, a childcare teacher, as a childcare teacher of the instant childcare center, only six hours a day from January 2017 to February 2017 (10:0 to 16:00) from January 2017 to February 2017.

On the premise that D is a teacher in charge, the Plaintiff applied for basic childcare fees on January 2017 and February 2, 2017, and received KRW 1,910,000 as subsidies from the Defendant.

However, the basic childcare fees are paid only when the ratio of the substitute child of the teachers prescribed in the "Child Care Business Guidance" prepared by the Minister of Health and Welfare in 2016. When included D in the number of teachers, the childcare center of this case complies with the ratio of the substitute child of the teachers prescribed in the "Child Care Business Guidance" in 2016, and the case where D is excluded from the number of teachers is not observed.

Under the premise that the Defendant’s attending a childcare center shall be a childcare teacher who works for eight hours a day in the daily working hours, and when calculating the ratio of the number of the school teachers who are the requirements for the payment of basic childcare fees, it shall be included in the number of the school teachers who work for eight hours a day in the daily working day. On June 15, 2017, the Defendant received basic childcare fees by falsely registering D, which is a childcare teacher, as a childcare teacher, and who is a childcare teacher, who is a teacher for eight hours a day in the daily working day, by means of false registration.

'The reason is that the Child Care Act Article 40, Article 45(1), Article 45-2, and Article 46 of the Infant Care Act ("the Infant Care Act") issued an order to return subsidy of KRW 1,910,000, the imposition of penalty surcharge of KRW 4,770,000 in lieu of three months of the suspension of operation of the child care center and the disposition of suspending the qualification

The plaintiff appealed against this and filed an administrative appeal, but was dismissed on August 21, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleading, the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition.