logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2014.8.29. 선고 2013누1506 판결
부정수급액반환명령취소등
Cases

2013Nu1506 Revocation, etc., of an order to return the illegally received amount

Plaintiff Appellant

1. Daejeon Traffic Company;

2. Daejeon bus stock company;

3. Mymnacam bus stock company;

4. Gold Traffic Stock Companies;

5. A joint transport company.

6. A bus stock company;

7. A joint transport company;

Defendant Elives

Daejeon Head of Local Employment and Labor Agency

The first instance judgment

Daejeon District Court Decision 2012Guhap4144 Decided August 28, 2013

Conclusion of Pleadings

July 24, 2014

Imposition of Judgment

August 29, 2014

Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed. 2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

The decision of the first instance court shall be revoked. Each disposition in the attached Form 1 written by the defendant against the plaintiffs on each date listed in the "date" in the attached Table 1 shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for the court's explanation of this case are as follows: (1) it is stated in the corresponding part of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance other than the closure or addition of each corresponding part of the workplace skill development training, and therefore, (2) it is no more than 2) it is necessary for the plaintiffs to find that the plaintiffs are entitled to separate charges for occupational ability development training under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. (6) The facts of "No. 7" should be added between the 6th "public health" and "No. 7" to the 1st public health care program and the 2nd public health care program, and if the plaintiffs were not entitled to additional charges for occupational ability development training under Article 1 to some trainees, the plaintiffs are not entitled to additional charges for occupational ability development training under Article 2 of the 2nd public health care program.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed in its entirety due to the lack of reasonable grounds, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges

The presiding judge shall receive the award of merit;

Judges Kim Gung-hoon

Judges Kim Jong-il

Note tin

1) Article 9(2) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Development of Workplace Skills of Workers (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Employment and Labor No. 5, Aug. 30, 2010

The same content was also stipulated in paragraph 3.

Attached Form

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

arrow