Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, it shall be 100.

1. The defendant A is the representative of the corporation B in the case of Pakistan.

No person shall employ any foreigner who has no status of sojourn eligible for employment activities.

Nevertheless, on July 28, 2016, the Defendant employed two foreigners, including D and E, who were illegally staying in the office of the above company without having the status of stay to engage in job-seeking activities.

2. Defendant B, a representative of the Defendant, employed two foreigners of Thailand nationality who did not have the status of stay to engage in job-seeking activities as described in the preceding paragraph.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Each statement of E and D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each notice of decision on examining an immigration offender;

1. Article 94 subparagraph 9 of the relevant Act and Article 18 (3) of the Immigration Control Act (Selection of Penalty) for the defendant Company B: Articles 99-3 subparagraph 2, 94 subparagraph 9, and 18 (3) for each immigration control Act;

1. Defendants who are subject to aggravated concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37 and Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A who is detained in a workhouse: Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act