A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles: (a) although the Defendant received the help of Pakistan D who suffered from excessive economic difficulties in Korea due to a large quantity of agricultural and livestock products operated by the Defendant, the Defendant did not employ D; (b) did not know that the above act of the Defendant was in conflict with the law.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of a fine of KRW 3,000,000 imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. According to the evidence adopted by the lower court, D is recognized as having received KRW 70,00 per day, and the fact that D was working in Company B operated by the Defendant, and the Defendant also stated that D was employed as a part-time hour between January 18, 2013 and February 18, 2013 and paid approximately KRW 1.4 million. Even if the Defendant had reached the above act to assist the same Korean national in the economic aspect, it does not constitute a justifiable act unless he paid a price to a person who is unable to engage in employment. 2) Although the Defendant did not know that such act was not in conflict with the law, it does not constitute a crime since he did not merely know that the Defendant did not know the fact that the law was established, this part of the claim is without merit.

B. The instant crime, which employs a foreigner who is not qualified for an employment decision on the assertion of unfair sentencing, is an act of reducing the employment opportunity of a national and a foreigner qualified for employment, and may also interfere with the immigration control of a foreigner.

The penalty for the instant crime is KRW 2 million from KRW 2 million to KRW 5 million.

Any other records and arguments.