beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From March 18, 2010, Plaintiff A served as the president of the D Child Care Center C located in Osan-si (hereinafter “instant Child Care Center”).
Plaintiff
B As a parent of Plaintiff A, Plaintiff A had three-class infant care teachers, and worked as infant care teachers at the child care center of this case from March 1, 2017 to September 10, 2018.
B. Plaintiff A at the Suwon District Court on February 20, 2019, Plaintiff B is as follows.
As described in paragraph (1), a summary order of KRW 3 million (No. 2018 high-ranking 24763) was issued for committing a crime of violating the Child Welfare Act that committed the Plaintiff’s physical abuse against the child. The above summary order was finalized as it is.
1. On August 20, 2018, the Defendant: (a) committed physical abuse on the ground that the victim E (three years of age) was not drinking for boomed; (b) on the grounds that the victim’s head was collected on the table table, and (c) up to August 23, 2018, the Defendant engaged in physical abuse that would inflict bodily injury on the victims or undermine physical health and development of the body eight times in total.
2. On September 10, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 12:24, on September 10, 2018, at the day when the victim F (the four years of age) was fluenced by the fluor’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’
C. On March 14, 2019, Plaintiff B was sentenced to the judgment of conviction of two years of suspended execution (2018Sang7203) for the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act and the crime of injury at the Suwon District Court, and the above judgment became final and conclusive.
Accordingly, in accordance with Article 46 (1) 1 of the Infant Care Act on April 29, 2019 and Article 39 (2) [Attachment Table 10] of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, the defendant has two years suspension of qualification for the plaintiff A.