1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From August 29, 2013, the Plaintiff is operating C Child Care Center (hereinafter “instant Child Care Center”).

B. On October 15, 2014, the Plaintiff obtained the assessment of childcare centers under Article 30 of the Infant Care Act (term of validity: from October 15, 2014 to October 14, 2017; hereinafter “instant assessment certification”) from the Defendant regarding the instant childcare centers.

C. On September 2, 2015, the Defendant rendered each of the following dispositions (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant dispositions”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that: (a) the Defendant received the basic childcare fees from September 21, 2014 to January 2015, and the basic childcare fees from October 21, 2014 to January 2015, 2015, on the ground that: (b) the Plaintiff was unfairly provided with the childcare fees from September 21, 2014 to January 2015; and (c) the Defendant took each of the following dispositions (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant dispositions”).

1) Pursuant to Article 40 of the Infant Care Act, an order to refund KRW 3,535,680 basic infant care fees paid (basic infant care fees shall be paid in the following month) from October 2014 to February 2015 (hereinafter “instant order to return subsidies”).

(2) Pursuant to Articles 45-2 and 45 of the Infant Care Act, the imposition of a penalty surcharge of KRW 4,500,000 in lieu of the suspension of operation of a child care center (hereinafter “instant imposition of the penalty surcharge”) pursuant to Article 46 of the Infant Care Act (hereinafter “instant imposition of the penalty surcharge”). In accordance with Article 46 of the Infant Care Act, suspension of qualification for the Plaintiff, the head of the instant child care center, for 1.5 months (period of suspension of qualification: November 1, 2015 to December 15, 2015; hereinafter “instant disposition of suspension of qualification”).

A person shall be appointed.

D. On October 1, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the revocation of each of the preceding dispositions of this case with the Suwon District Court. On March 29, 2016, the Suwon District Court: (a) compared to the case in which the Plaintiff was incorporated into the Suwon District Court on the fourth anniversary of the year that was actually being taken care of D and E by incorporating the Plaintiff into the fourth anniversary of the year that was actually being taken care of D and E, the said two young children.