1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. A social welfare foundation H (hereinafter “instant foundation”) is operating nine social welfare facilities, such as I and J workplace, K workplace, K workplace, L Center, M Center, N Center, etc.

B. On May 23, 2019, the Daegu Metropolitan City Police Agency notified the Defendant of the violation of the Social Welfare Services Act by the instant foundation and its affiliated facilities, such as “Embezzlement of management allowance and use for any purpose other than the original purpose, embezzlement of job assistance expenses, use for any purpose other than the original purpose, and use for subsidies (operating expenses).”

C. Around that time, the representative director of the instant foundation, Plaintiff B, C, D, and E were directors of the instant foundation, Plaintiff F, and G, respectively, serving as the auditor of the instant foundation.

On May 27, 2019, based on Article 22-2 of the Social Welfare Services Act, Articles 61, 65, and 67 of the Civil Act, the Defendant issued a disposition suspending the performance of duties against the Plaintiffs, who are executive officers of the Foundation of this case.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) e.

On June 7, 2019, the Defendant ordered the instant foundation to dismiss the Plaintiffs on the grounds of Article 22(1)2 of the Social Welfare Services Act, Article 10-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Social Welfare Services Act, etc.

(f) The instant foundation held a board of directors on September 10, 2019 and dismissed the Plaintiffs from the position of representative director, director, and auditor.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 3 evidence, Eul's 1 through 4, 28, 29 evidence (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

(a) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes;

B. A lawsuit seeking revocation of an illegal administrative disposition is a lawsuit seeking restoration to the original state by removing an illegal state caused by the illegal disposition, and protection and remedy of the rights and interests infringed or interfered with the disposition.