1. The Defendant’s restitution disposition of KRW 16,227,70, and support for disabled persons’ activities, rendered to Plaintiff A on June 20, 2017.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs are activity support personnel who belong to the C Center (D) and conduct activity support allowances for persons with disabilities.

B. As a result of the comprehensive consulting audit conducted from February 1, 2017 to February 16, 2017, the public official belonging to Gyeonggi-do confirmed that the E and F resided in the “G” (hereinafter “G”) which is a residential facility for persons with disabilities located in Pyeongtaek-si from May 2016 to February 6, 2017, and notified the Defendant of the fact on April 24, 2017.

C. Accordingly, according to Articles 19, 30, and 35 of the Act on Activity Assistant Services for Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter “Act on Activity Assistant Services for Persons with Disabilities”), the Defendant: (a) on May 20, 2017, when the recipient E and F entered G as a residential facility for persons with disabilities and there was a circumstance that the Plaintiff should suspend the provision of activity support allowances to E and F from that time; (b) on the ground that the Plaintiff received each payment of the cost of activity support allowances from the Defendant from May 2016 to February 2017; and (c) on the ground that the Plaintiff was subject to the respective payment of the cost of activity support allowances for E and F from May 2016 to February 2017, the Plaintiff issued a disposition of suspending qualification for the person with disabilities from that time to 16,227,70 won redemption of unfair benefits and suspension of qualification for the person with disabilities from that time to 20 months from that time to 208.28, 2017 (the Plaintiff’s redemption of qualifications for the person with disabilities from 208.

(hereinafter collectively referred to as "each of the instant dispositions") D.

The Plaintiffs appealed and filed an appeal on July 14, 2017. However, the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiffs’ claim on November 6, 2017.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1 and 2 (if there is a serial number, including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul Nos. 1, 2 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiffs' assertion.