1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the dismissal or addition of each corresponding part of the judgment of the court of the first instance, and therefore, it is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the

Nos. 6, 14, “Health Team,” and “Evidence Nos. 1 through 7,” are added to “The facts No. 7,” as follows; 4. A’s representative B evaluated “the fact” on the Internet at least once a month to trainees under distance training; but it did not implement it on the Internet; however, a part of trainees took part of a sheet where the objective of objective and subjective evaluation is included; most trainees entered the answer at the end, or submitted it only with their signature at the direction of A’s employees; 5. In addition, instead of paying training teaching materials per person for each trainee, the fact that partially paid them to the Plaintiffs in lieu of general books is equivalent to the amount of “Article 9, 19,” and accordingly, A’s representative B’s provision on “the aforementioned additional amount” and “the purpose and effect of Article 20 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Development of Workplace Skills and Workers’ Training” are prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Employment and Labor as a whole in light of the purpose and effect of Article 30 of the aforementioned provision and its implementation Rule.

The employer has received subsidies or loans by fraud or other improper means.