1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff is a legal entity that operates home welfare projects and support projects for the disabled, and the Defendant is delegated by the Minister of Employment and Labor with the authority to collect charges and additional charges for the disabled pursuant to Article 82 of the former Employment Promotion and Vocational Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Act (amended by Act No. 14500, Dec. 27, 2016; hereinafter “former Employment Promotion and Vocational Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Act”); Article 82(2)20 and 22 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Employment Promotion and Vocational Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 28369, Oct. 17, 2017; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree of the Employment of Disabled Persons Act”).

Under the premise that the Plaintiff is an employee of the former Healthy Family Support Center (hereinafter “instant center”) (hereinafter “employee”), the Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff fell short of the number of employees with disabilities in the year from 2014 to 2016 as indicated below (attached Table 1); (b) on December 1, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition to collect the employment charges and additional charges for disabled persons as listed below (attached Table 2) pursuant to Articles 33 and 35 of the former Act on the Employment of Persons with Disabilities.

(hereinafter referred to as "each disposition of this case" in total with each collection disposition on the employment charges and surcharges of persons with disabilities. [Attachment 1] The number of persons calculated as of the month of the regular workers of the year is calculated.

(hereinafter the same shall apply)

The number of disabled workers less than the number of disabled workers is 2014 1,491 34 12222 2015 1,491 2015 1,491 25 2016 1,592 36 142 [Attachment 2] attached Table 2] 20,680,680,660 2,068,060 2,168,168,168,000 1,816,80 (unit: won) / [based on recognition] / The Plaintiff did not have any dispute over the legitimate recruitment procedures of the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff did not pay the benefits to the employees in the labor relationship of this case without any assertion as to the legitimate recruitment procedures of the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Plaintiff.