1. On May 18, 2016, the Defendant’s order to return KRW 5,585,000 granted to the Plaintiff is revoked.

2. The plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the founder and the president of a child-care center who has been operating the “C Child-care center” in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from June 30, 2005.

B. The Defendant issued an order to return KRW 547,00 for the Plaintiff on May 18, 2016 to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff had falsely registered the number of days of attendance of children who are financed by the Plaintiff from January 2012 to February 2013 and received basic childcare fees of KRW 547,00” under Article 40 subparag. 3, Article 45(1)1, and Article 46 subparag. 4 of the former Infant Care Act (amended by Act No. 11858, Jun. 4, 2013; hereinafter the same) of the Infant Care Act (amended by Act No. 11858, Jun. 4, 2013; hereinafter the same) for one month of the suspension of operation of the childcare center and one month of the suspension of the president’s qualification, and one month of the suspension of the subsidies, five,585,00 (the entire basic childcare fees in the corresponding month in which illegal receipt was made)

C. On September 26, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission on each of the above dispositions, and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling on September 26, 2016 that "one month of each suspension period of operation suspension and suspension of president qualification is changed to 15 days each, and a petition for an appeal against the order to return subsidies

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant dispositions”) 15 days of suspension of the operation of a child care center reduced as above among the dispositions of suspension of the operation of a child care center for one month of May 18, 2016 and one month of suspension of the qualification for the head of the kindergarten, the disposition of suspension of the head’s qualification 15 days of suspension of the head’s qualification, and the order of return of KRW 5,585,000 of the above subsidies, which were combined with the order of return of KRW 5,585,00,

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the non-existence of the grounds for disposition 1 by the Plaintiff exceeded KRW 547,00,00 for basic childcare fees for the following reasons is granted subsidies by fraud or other improper means.