The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that “D” operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant education center”) is merely a creative play program, paper fold, missionary English, etc., and it is not necessary to complete registration under the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Private Teaching Institutes and Extracurricular Lessons.

2. The summary of the facts charged in this case is a person who operates a private teaching institute for infants (4-6 years of age) who are 'D' on the sixth floor of the Seo-gu Incheon Building C.

Any person who intends to establish and operate a private teaching institute shall prepare facilities and equipment referred to in Article 8 and enter personal information of the founder, curriculum, name of instructors, tuition fees, etc., facilities and equipment, etc. in the application for registration of establishment and operation of the private teaching institute, and register them with the superintendent of education,

Nevertheless, the Defendant, without the above registration, operated the said private teaching institute from October 201 to April 29, 2013.

3. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s above assertion and found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the following grounds.

If the religious education of a religious organization takes the form of a private teaching institute under the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Private Teaching Institutes and Extracurricular Lessons, not by the pure sexual officers or the teaching curricula inside the religious organization, it shall be subject to the regulation of the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Private Teaching Institutes and Extracurricular Lessons which require the establishment of educational institutions to satisfy certain facilities, the organization of facilities, and other standards for establishment of educational institutions in order to actively protect the right of citizens to receive education (see Supreme Court Decision 9Du6002, Feb. 23, 2001).

According to the above evidence in the judgment, the defendant from October 201 to April 29, 2013.