1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following matters:

The 6th parallel 15th parallel to 7th parallel parallel 4th parallel are as follows:

In light of the following circumstances, which can be recognized by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments as to evidence Nos. 4, 1, 2, 10, and 15 of “A”, it is reasonable to deem that D did not work for eight hours a day at the instant childcare center from July 201 to April 2012. It is difficult to see otherwise solely with the statement Nos. 2, 14, 15, and 17 (including the number of branches). Therefore, D does not constitute a childcare teacher on the premise of eight hours a day-to-day work, which is the requirement for granting subsidies for personnel expenses for infant care teachers. ① The Plaintiff appears to include D’s reimbursement of wages from 2014 to 300 hours a day-to-day work-to-day work-on-day work-on-day work-on-day work-on-day work-on-day work-on-day work-on-day work-on-day work-on-child work-on-child work-related-related worker.

(3) The Plaintiff returned 5,096,940 won, including Saturdays, to the Plaintiff, in total for 54 hours (10 hours a day, 4 hours a Saturday, 5 hours a Saturday, 5 days a day) including Saturdays, by remitting some of them to the Plaintiff’s personal deposit account.