(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.12.10. 선고 2014구합1505 판결

On July 31, 2014, the Defendant’s disposition of returning KRW 391,700 to the Plaintiff for vocational ability development training expenses and additionally collecting the same amount shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff's status

The Plaintiff is a person who operated the C Center in the Jeonnam-gun B and closed on October 11, 2013. B. Vocational skills development training

The Plaintiff entered into an entrustment contract for workplace skill development training conducted by means of Internet remote training with a new education center, a commissioned educational company (hereinafter referred to as “instant training institution”), and conducted Internet remote training for workers belonging to C Center operated by the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “instant training”) from February 5, 2012 to July 14, 2012, as shown in attached Table 1.

C. On May 29, 2013, the Governor of the Jeollabuk-do Provincial Police Agency notified the results of the investigation into the instant training institution at the request of the head of the Jeonju District Police Office, and notified the head of the relevant Jeonju District Police Agency of the investigation results that "the head of the instant training institution obtained government subsidies through fraudulent completion necessary for refund" in collusion with business employees by developing automatic learning programs (hereinafter referred to as "Automatic learning programs") in the course of Internet remote training conducted from January 14, 2012 to August 25, 2012 by the instant training institution during the course of Internet remote training (hereinafter referred to as "Automatic learning programs"), and by automatically proceeding the process necessary for the completion of test and evaluation.

D. The defendant's disposition

Based on the investigation results of the Jeju Provincial Police Agency and the investigation results of the Jeonju Regional Labor Agency, the Defendant issued a disposition on July 31, 2014 regarding the completion of Internet distance training on the basis of Article 8(1)2(b) of the Regulations on the Assistance to Workplace Skill Development with respect to a business owner on the Support of Workplace Skill Development Training, which is at least 80/100 of the learning rate, but the D Center, even though the actual research rate of its employees is less than 80/100, filed a claim for training fees for trainees who completed false training and received training fees of KRW 391,70 on the ground that the Plaintiff did not receive training fees on the ground that Article 55(2)1 and Article 56(2)2 and 56(3)2 of the Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers (hereinafter referred to as the “Act on the Development of Workplace Skills”) with respect to the instant training institute (hereinafter referred to as “the aforementioned disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 7 evidence, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 10 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The instant disposition should be revoked on the grounds that it is unlawful for the following reasons.

1) In light of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have illegally received training fees in relation to the instant training. Therefore, there is no legitimate ground for disposition in the instant disposition.

A) Although the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s employees did not actually attend most of the instant training, the Defendant had conducted abnormal training using the automatic training program, the evidence submitted by the Defendant is insufficient to recognize it as having no credibility.

B) The rate of study performance can be calculated by using any one of the calculation methods for total study hours and the calculation methods for each hour, and when the Plaintiff’s employee uses the automatic medical program, each time may be terminated by inserting the “NEXT” server at the next time. Therefore, if the study performance rate is calculated by the calculation method for the next time, even if the automatic medical program was used, the relevant difference is terminated. Therefore, such circumstance alone cannot be deemed as less than 80/10 of the learning performance rate.

In addition, in the instant training, the planning ability improvement consists of a total of 26 seconds, each of which consists of HTL images and SWF images, and in the case of HTS images, the NEXT images may be activated and continue to be trained on the next occasion. However, in the case of WF images, it is possible to promptly reduce, stop, back, cut back, cut back, and turn back back to the next page. Therefore, if the HTL images were learning by the HTM image, it would be possible to manage Jindo-do by the method of calculating the total learning time if the HF images were learning by the method of calculating the total learning time.In the case of automated program, the defendant did not confirm the learning progress rate through the method of using the WF images, and thus the defendant did not confirm it.

C) The Plaintiff did not know whether the Plaintiff completed the automatic medical program in a false manner, and the above manipulation was caused by the Defendant’s poor management, such as the Defendant’s breach of duty, and thus, cannot be held liable to the Plaintiff.

2) A deviation from or abuse of discretionary power

In light of the above circumstances, the instant disposition was abused and abused discretion in violation of the principle of proportionality.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Whether there is no ground to dispose of

1) Facts of recognition

In addition to the facts without dispute, Gap evidence 16 through 26, Eul evidence 11, 13, and 16 through 20 (including each number), Eul evidence 21, Eul evidence 21, and the result of this court's order to submit documents to Gwangju Branch, the following facts may be acknowledged, and there is no counter-proof otherwise.

A) The instant training institution’s action procedure for the AED program and the AED program produced by the instant training institution and operated for the entire training courses and the entire trainees entrusted to it shall be operated in the following manner:

(1) The automatic map program installed in the web server (IP) of the instant training institution shall work at a certain time and time set forth below.

A person shall be appointed.

(2) The AED program access to the database server (IP:F) of the instant training institution, results in a voluntary number of trainees being commissioned by the instant training institution, and results in the training course under which the trainees are enrolled, the course under which the trainees are enrolled, and the number of trainees from 0 to 10 after ascertaining the information on the progress of the study, and, depending on their value, repeats those actions as set forth in sub-paragraph (3) below with respect to the entire trainees.

(3) (1) If the generated voluntary number of trainees is less than 4, the action under Paragraph (2) above shall result in the procedure by which the trainee confirms one of the following trainees’ participation in the training course and the information on the progress of the study and create a voluntary number of trainees.

(2) If the generated voluntary number of trainees is at least five, the records of the last course shall be created from the date following the training content of the trainees, if the records of the trainees are recorded, to the extent that the records are not recorded, from the first page of the first page to the date of learning, and from the first page to the date of reaching the target rate within the limit not exceeding the next hour limit of the trainees’ day, if the records of the course are not recorded, and the following methods shall be applied:

First of all, it creates a voluntary number between the beginning point of learning and the beginning point of 250, and records the database server as if the trainee took a part in the number of voluntary numbers generated by accessing the page, and if the record is terminated, it creates and records a voluntary number of classes in the same manner as the next page or the next rent.

(4) On the other hand, automatic dust programs do not create the current page learning commencement time by adding up the learning hours of all pages created voluntarily from the previous page learning commencement time of the developer's actual number, but rather create the current page learning commencement time by adding the current page learning time generated voluntarily from the previous page learning commencement time (this Court's order to submit a document to the Gwangju branch of the Korean Industrial Manpower and Manpower Corporation of the Republic of Korea to "2." 278.xls file inside the 278.xls file of the 10: 0: 10: 10: 10: 27: 10: 10: 27: 10: 12: 10: 27: 4: 100 of the first page learning time, which is lower than the 4: 10:00 of the first page learning time, if the first page training was conducted normally.

A person shall be appointed.

B) Method of calculating the Defendant’s academic achievement rate

The Defendant analyzed the course of study for all trainees of the instant training institution and the learning time for each page (the same as the result of an order to submit documents to the Gwangju branch of the Human Resources Development Service of this Court) and assessed the actual learning rate of the instant training as shown in the attached Table 2 (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant calculated Jindo”), excluding the fact that the trainee did not take a course, with respect to the records consistent with the error of the instant automated map program.

2) Determination.

In full view of the following reasons, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit, since it can be sufficiently recognized that the Plaintiff received training fees by fraud or other improper means.

A) In full view of the following circumstances that can be seen by adding to the purport of the entire pleadings in the above facts as to whether the defendant's Jindo percentage was false or lacking probative value, the defendant's Jindo percentage was calculated based on objective data, and it cannot be deemed that the defendant erred in the calculation method or false involvement was made in the calculation process. On the other hand, the defendant's Jindo percentage cannot be said to be false or lacking probative value solely on the grounds of the circumstances asserted by the plaintiff.

(1) First, the Plaintiff appears to be understood as the function of a trainee to take the next page or the next page by using SWF images, even if the trainee did not have access to the automatic medical program to the Internet training course and did not take all the given page or the next screen. However, as seen earlier, even if the trainee does not have access to the website for the Internet training course operated by the instant training institution, the automatic medical program is a program recording the appearance of the same as that of the trainee’s taking the database of the instant training institution (i.e., the Plaintiff’s taking the “learning start-up view,” but the learning start-up view refers to the learning start-up view that the trainee has access to the relevant page, and thus, it is not related to the street, i.e., no relation with the program).

Therefore, in the case of a course record created by the automatic earthquake program, the trainee did not take part in the city and the waste, so whether the Jindo rate is between the city and the city, or between the city and the total time of learning, does not affect the calculation of the Jindo rate.

(2) If the function of the AED program is as above, it is obvious that the AED program cannot be recognized for the record of course created by the AED program.

(3) However, there are errors as seen in the above 1) A (4) in the automatic acceleration program, and the defendant's calculation method that determined that the class records of the contents consistent with such errors are false by the automatic acceleration program cannot be deemed to have been erroneous.

(4) Meanwhile, the Plaintiff appears to have understood that, in the event that the AED program is operated, all of the lecture records that the trainee was normally removed and that the AED program is replaced by the lecture records created. However, as seen in the above 1)(a)(2) and (3), the AED program created the course records from the last lecture records on the relevant trainee (i.e., whether the last lecture records are those created by the trainee under training or are not classified as the class records created by the AED program). As such, there is no possibility that a trainee’s normal lecture records may be deleted.

B) Article 20 of the Vocational Skills Development Act provides that the Minister of Employment and Labor may grant subsidies to a business owner who operates workplace skill development training by fraud or other improper means to cover expenses incurred in workplace skill development training. Article 55 of the same Act provides that a business owner may order the return of the amount provided by fraud or other improper means among the amount already provided by Article 56(2) and (3) of the same Act and the return of the amount not exceeding the amount of unlawful payment may be additionally collected. "False or other improper means" as provided in the above provision refers to all active and passive acts that can not affect the decision-making on subsidization by social norms with an intention to see that a person who is not eligible to receive subsidies is deemed eligible or that a person is not eligible to receive subsidies by fraud or other improper means. According to the relevant provision, "expenses for workplace skill development training" refers to expenses incurred in workplace skill development training by a business owner, etc. who is recognized as eligible to receive subsidies from the Minister of Labor depending on the number of trainees completed training, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Du1930.).

In light of the above legal principles, Article 8 subparag. 2(b) of the Regulations on Assistance in the Development of Vocational Skills (amended by the Ministry of Employment and Labor No. 2012-118, Oct. 25, 2012) provides that “In the case of an Internet remote training course, such as the instant training, the rate of learning progress shall be at least 80/100” as the standard for the payment of subsidies. Thus, if the above rate of learning was less than 80/10 but the above rate of learning was less than 80/10 and the person received the training fee by creating the appearance as if it was 80/100 or more, it is naturally deemed that the person received the training fee by fraudulent or other unlawful means.

C) Since there is no negligence on the part of the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s breach of duty, etc., it is not possible for the Plaintiff to be responsible, and Articles 55(2)1 and 56(2) and (3) of the Vocational Skills Development Act merely stipulate that the Plaintiff was provided with subsidies by false or other unlawful means, and do not stipulate any subjective elements separately. Since sanctions against the violation of administrative regulations are sanctions against the objective fact of violation of administrative regulations in order to achieve administrative objectives, sanctions are imposed not only on the actual actor but also on the person prescribed as the person in charge under the statutes, barring special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du1297, May 10, 2012). Thus, insofar as the Plaintiff applied for subsidies for training expenses differently from the fact that the trainees of training courses entrusted to the instant training institution meet the standards for completion, the Plaintiff constitutes a case where the Plaintiff was provided with subsidies by false or other unlawful means (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Du13830, Apr. 130, 201900.

Furthermore, considering the following circumstances that can be known in addition to the purport of the entire argument in the above facts, i.e., ① the automatic map program created a normal course record in appearance, and the external appearance was introduced in a way that generates the number of voluntary lectures in the process, the defendant's mere review of the record of the course alone seems to have been difficult to understand that the record of the course was operated by the automatic map program, and ② the plaintiff's duty to supervise whether he/she is a business owner who entrusted the training to the training institution of this case, was conducting the training at all, even though he/she was obligated to supervise whether he/she is conducting the training at all, the plaintiff's failure to perform such supervision cannot be deemed to be the defendant's fault merely because the plaintiff's assertion is insufficient.

B. In light of the circumstances seen earlier prior to the deviation from and abuse of discretionary power and the legislative intent of the remote training system, (1) an employer’s appropriate management is essential in light of the vocational ability development system and the legislative intent of the remote training system; (2) an act of receiving training fees on the basis of false learning rate constitutes a violation against the part of making vocational ability development system clear and grounded on the purpose of the vocational ability development system itself; (3) training expenses are paid from the National budget and the Employment Report Fund created by employment insurance premium, and thus, the damage would be returned to the employee; (4) it is necessary to strictly punish and dispose of the aforementioned illegal receipt; and (3) the Defendant did each of the dispositions in this case within the scope of the disposition criteria stipulated in the vocational ability development Act and subordinate statutes.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges

The presiding judge, the Park Judge;

Judge Senior Professor

Support for Judges

Note tin

1) In addition, the Plaintiff is obligated to bear the expenses incurred in relation to ① the eligible recipient for preferential support who can receive 100% subsidies for training costs.

As such, there is no need for reimbursement of training costs and there is no need for such act, ii) decoration.

It is true that a training institution has received some training costs first or subsequently returned from a training institution, but this is the number of training institutions.

It is not only a waiver of profit but not a ‘false or other unlawful means' as provided in Article 56 of the Vocational Skills Development Act.

(1) If a business owner receives prior support or refund of training expenses, he/she shall be deemed to have claimed that the expenses are actually paid by the business owner.

false prepared as if the training institution has paid the full amount of the training expenses even though there is no expense or the amount equivalent to the subsidy.

The phrase "the application for subsidization of training costs" is not a ground for the disposition of this case, which is not a reason to this effect.

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.