When a foreigner intends to obtain employment in the Republic of Korea, he/she shall obtain the status of sojourn eligible for employment activities, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and no person shall employ any person who has no status of sojourn.

The Defendant, as a de facto operator of the G amusement shop located in Gangwon-do, from August 15, 2017 to September 19, 2017, without the status of sojourn eligible for employment at the said establishment (n, E, E, Thailand), F (n, G, Thailand), H (n, I, Thailand), from September 10, 2017 to September 19, 2017, the Defendant did not have the status of sojourn eligible for employment at the said establishment (n, K, R, R), L (n, R, R, R, R), R, R) and Q, from September 17, 2017 to September 19, 2017 to which the Defendant did not have the status of sojourn eligible for employment at each of the above establishments (n, Q, etc.). The Defendant did not have the status of sojourn for employment at each of the P, R, and Q, etc. (O).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in the first trial record;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the suspect of the defendant or R;

1. A written accusation against an immigration offender;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (related to attachment of a written accusation);

1. Article 94 Subparag. 9 of the relevant Act and Articles 18(3) and 18(1) of the Immigration Control Act regarding criminal facts, the choice of imprisonment [the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, which became final and conclusive on February 11, 2017) due to the same crime, and the Defendant was punished for the same crime even in around 2012, and escaped without being present on the date of sentence];

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;