logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.4.3. 선고 2017누87458 판결
사회복지법위반보조금환수처분등취소
Cases

2017Nu87458 Revocation of the disposition, etc. of receiving subsidies in violation of the Social Welfare Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

A An incorporated association

Defendant Appellant

The head of Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City

The first instance judgment

Incheon District Court Decision 2016Guhap1428 Decided November 10, 2017

Conclusion of Pleadings

March 13, 2018

Imposition of Judgment

April 3, 2018

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition on March 29, 2016 against the Plaintiff: ① Recovery of subsidies in violation of the Social Welfare Services Act of KRW 2,100,000 on the payment of trading and life-saving gifts and transportation expenses for corporate executives; ② Payment of two-month benefits to the human resources in support projects for the promotion of organizations with disabilities in 2014; and each corrective disposition on the payment of two-month benefits to the human resources in support projects for the promotion of organizations with disabilities in 2014.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Quotation of the first instance judgment

The grounds for the Defendant’s assertion in the trial are not different from the allegations in the first instance trial, and the judgment of the first instance court, which was accepted at the Plaintiff’s request, is recognized as legitimate even after examining the submitted evidence together with the assertion of the evidence. The reasons for this case are as follows: “No. 9 of the first instance judgment, No. 4 of the first instance judgment, No. 2016, No. 1826 of the first instance judgment, “No. 2016, No. 1836 of the fifth 5, Dec. 18, 2016,” and “No. 4 of the fifth 5, Dec. 28, 2016,” and “No. 2017Do17198 of the Criminal Procedure Act,” and “No. 14 of the sixth 5, No. 2017, Dec. 27, 2017,” respectively, the Prosecutor’s appeal (Supreme Court Decision 2017Do17198).

2. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted on the ground of its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed on the ground of its ground.

Judges

Judges Lee Young-young

Judge Park Jong-ok

Judges Lee Jae-woo

arrow