logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.01.11 2018누59573
반환명령 및 추가징수 결정 등 취소
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the following among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (excluding paragraph (2)) (excluding paragraph (2)) is the same as the part of the plaintiffs, except for adding the judgment

5. The two pages "this Court" shall be regarded as "Incheon District Court".

7. The 5th page "judgments, etc." is referred to as "see judgment, etc.".

8. In 12, "The results of the investigation by the base station on the results of the investigation by the base station" shall be "the results of the investigation by the base station".

The 8th parallel 15th parallel 16th parallel 16th parallel 16th parallel 16th parallel 2th parallel as follows:

“False or other unlawful means” provided for in each of the disciplinary measures under Articles 55 and 56 of the Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers refers to all acts that are not correct under the social norms in order to make sure that a person who is not eligible to receive training costs is qualified, or to conceal the fact that he/she is not qualified, and that may affect the decision-making on the payment of training costs (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Du24764, Jul. 24, 2014). In addition, the sanctions against administrative violations are sanctions against the objective facts of violation of administrative regulations to achieve administrative purposes, as they are imposed not by a real actor, but by intention or negligence on a person who is stipulated as a legal manager (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Du1297, May 10, 2012).

arrow