Seoul Administrative Court, ruling on public announcement of list of daycare centers receiving subsidies illegally

(Seoul = Yonhap News) Reporter Bitna Kim = The court ruled that the district office's action for illegally receiving 100 million won in subsidies and disclosing the names of daycare centers and directors who falsely registered children and daycare teachers was justified.

According to the legal community on the 5th, the 8th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Yang Soon-ju) recently ruled that the plaintiff lost in a lawsuit filed by a daycare center representative and others against the head of Gangdong-gu to cancel the announcement of the list of daycare centers for violation of the Infant and Toddler Care Act.

In 2024, the Gangdong-gu Office received a tip that “children attending a daycare center in Hanam-si, Gyeonggi-do are also registered at a daycare center in Gangdong-gu, Seoul.”

As a result of the district office investigation, it was found that Daycare Center A illegally received a total of 110 million won in subsidies from 2022 to 2024 by falsely registering teachers and children or manipulating attendance.

A person who was not qualified to be a childcare teacher was also assigned to be a homeroom teacher.

The district office closed the daycare center in question in 2024, reclaimed the subsidy, and revoked the director's qualifications.

The following year, it was decided to announce the details of administrative dispositions, the address and name of the daycare center, and the names of the representative and director for three years.

In response, Daycare Center A filed a lawsuit, claiming that there were procedural defects, such as the district office's investigation being conducted coercively and without prior notice.

However, the court did not accept all of Daycare A’s claims.

The court said, “This was a case where it was judged that the purpose could not be achieved due to destruction of evidence if the investigation was notified in advance,” and “The purpose of the investigation was legally notified orally at the scene.”

The basis for the decision was that the former director, who actually ran the daycare center, contacted some parents and falsely registered staff members and attempted to persuade them.

The court said, "Some parents were offered money if they falsely registered their children," and added, "It is also confirmed that children were recorded as having attended school later even though they had already attended school, or were falsely recorded as having attended school even though they were absent."

The court dismissed the plaintiff's claim, saying that the district office's actions could not be considered unfair, and daycare center A appealed, and the second trial is currently in progress.