The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding or legal principles are that Defendant A worked as a teacher in the process of performing the duties of the head office, and the teacher in charge of the duties of the head office may receive treatment improvement expenses and the cost of improving the working environment of teachers. In addition, Defendant A was hospitalized by Defendant B’s mother around March 2013 and did not work as a teacher in charge of the head office for all hours from around that time to around March 2013 pursuant to Article 18(2) of the Infant Care Act, and thus, Defendant A did not receive at least a basic childcare fee corresponding to the period from January 2013 to March 2013.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts or by misapprehending legal principles, which affected the conclusion of judgment

B. Each sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (Defendant A: fine of 700,000 won, Defendant B: fine of 3 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The relevant statutes stipulate that the State or local self-government organizations shall fully or partially subsidize expenses incurred in infant care services, such as personnel expenses of infant care teachers, as prescribed by Presidential Decree. Article 24(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Infant Care Act provides that matters necessary for the methods of subsidization of such expenses shall be determined by the Minister of Health and Welfare or the head of the relevant local self-government organization, and accordingly, the Minister of Health and Welfare and Gyeonggi-do shall provide the guidelines for “Guidance for Infant Care Services” and specifically determine the scope of subsidies, requirements for subsidization, amount of subsidies, etc.

Persons eligible for support for improvement of treatment under Article 36 of the Infant Care Act and Article 24 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Infant Care Act, which are prepared by the Gyeonggi-do branch, shall be subject to the same delegation.