The request of the applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

The Defendant is a person who operates a F salt farm in Southern-gun E and produces and sells sun-dried salt.

On April 2010, the Defendant introduced the victim D at a job placement office where it is difficult to know the trade name at the time of Mapopopopos, and then would pay the victim wages normally to the victim. As such, the Defendant would drink at our home to drink, rework, and pay the monthly wage of KRW 350,000 per month.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, the Defendant was aware of the fact that he was unable to exercise his right to claim wages due to his low intelligence and smooth communication so that he was unable to exercise his right to claim wages. Therefore, the Defendant did not have an intention or ability to pay wages normally to the victim.

Therefore, the Defendant had the victim work in the Defendant’s salt farm, etc. from April 2010 to February 28, 2014, and did not pay a total of KRW 4,098,769,000,000 as indicated in the attached Table of Crimes, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to D;

1. For the purpose of making a statement to the accused available for public inspection by the police (two times in case of the defendant’s statement in the south-Seoul metropolitan investigation team G);

1. Investigation report (the monetary content of the victim related to the confirmation of the period of work);

1. Investigation report (the other party's search forH village residents);

1. Investigation report (the first visit, etc. to the head of this Chapter before residents in the village);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on a copy of a victim's DNA welfare card (Grade III);

1. Relevant Article 348 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 348 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Sentencing under Article 25 subparag. 3 subparag. 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits for Dismissal of Application for Compensation (which is recognized as improper to issue an order for compensation in criminal proceedings);

1. Determination of types of crime: One type of fraud (less than 100 million won).

2. Determination of the scope of sentence: Reduction area, from one year to one year (the person who is a person who is a special mitigation offender: Recovery of damage);

3. The decision of sentence shall be operated by the defendant; and