1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and when comprehensively examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of first instance and this court, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified and they do not seem to be erroneous.

Therefore, the reasoning for this court's explanation is as follows. Thus, the reasoning for this court's explanation is the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Determination on addition

A. Article 16(2) of the instant consignment operation agreement provides that the Defendant shall notify the Plaintiff of the termination in writing at least three months prior to the termination of the consignment operation agreement. However, the above provision cannot be deemed effective as it damages or goes beyond the scope of the regulation on the permission to use and benefit from administrative property under the Public Property and Commodity Management Act (hereinafter “Public Property Act”), which is a mandatory law, and it is argued that there was no error in the procedure for cancelling the consignment operation agreement of this case since the Defendant provided an opportunity to explain to the Plaintiff through the hearing under Article 26 of the Public Property Act before the termination of the instant consignment operation agreement.

However, for the entrusted operation of the instant welfare center, which is a facility established by a local government, the Plaintiff entered into an entrusted operation agreement with the Defendant pursuant to the Social Welfare Services Act and the Enforcement Rule thereof. Article 3 of the Social Welfare Services Act provides that “The contents, procedures, etc. of social welfare services shall be governed by the provisions of this Act, except as otherwise expressly provided for in any item of subparagraph 1 of Article 2 regarding the contents, etc. of social welfare services.” Thus, the Plaintiff’s permission for use of