(2) On October 21, 201, the Defendant: (a) on November 21, 2008, went on a fishing vessel at the Chinese Grand Port, and stayed in the Republic of Korea through Incheon Port after navigation; (b) was arrested on October 20, 201; and (c) was forced to enter the Republic of Korea on October 31, 201; and (d) when the entry of the Republic of Korea was prohibited by October 21, 201, the Defendant was willing to enter the Republic of Korea via the next line.

[Criminal facts] When a foreigner enters the Republic of Korea, he/she must undergo an entry inspection by an immigration officer with a valid passport and visa issued by the Minister of Justice.

Although there is no valid passport and visa issued by the Minister of Justice of the Republic of Korea, the Defendant paid 80,000 square meters (per KRW 13,500,000,000) to a broker engaging in trade secret entry in the name of China at around October 2015, the Defendant entered the Republic of Korea without undergoing an entry inspection by immigration control officials in the manner that he/she goes beyond the border of the Republic of Korea for three days after his/her navigation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Inquiry into comprehensive records of persons related to entry or departure, screen of the case, notice of review on and determination of immigration offenders, emergency detention, deportation order, suspect Kakao Stockholm;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (report on search of suspect bio-information);

1. Relevant Article of the relevant Act on the facts constituting an offense, subparagraph 1 of Article 93-3 of the Immigration Control Act, Article 12 (1) (out of entry inspection), subparagraph 2 of Article 94, and Article 7 (1) (out of possession of passport and visa) of the Immigration Control Act, and each choice of imprisonment;

1. In full view of the circumstances constituting the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, such as the following circumstances for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence like the order shall be imposed.

The defendant is also in the past.