사기등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The grounds of appeal (misunderstanding of the legal principles) stated the different job-seeking details in the application form for recognition of unemployment, and the different periods of unemployment recognition are different, and the specific contents of deception are different, and it cannot be deemed that the Defendant committed each crime under a single and continuous criminal intent, since it was not a certain place at the time of applying for unemployment benefits, but is not a definite one, and therefore, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes under a single and continuous criminal intent. Therefore, each of the instant crimes is a substantive concurrent crime, not a single
subsection (b) of this section.
2. The summary of the facts charged is a person who operates a restaurant in the name of "D" in the name of "D" at the 2nd floor located in Ilyang-dong, Busan Metropolitan City.
On December 2, 2015, the Defendant applied for recognition of eligibility for unemployment benefits at the high-level branch office of the Korea Labor Agency of Middle-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government located in Yongsan-gu, Busan Metropolitan City, 32-16, and served as an employee from the ‘F' restaurant operated by his/her own type of punishment in the case of strike from the beginning of December 2, 2015 to April 18, 2016.
Nevertheless, Defendant: (a) concealed the working facts in the “F” restaurant operated by the foregoing type; (b) prepared an application for recognition of unemployment with the purport that the Defendant did not work until December 2, 2015 to April 6, 2016; and (c) submitted it to the senior branch office of the Central and Middle Regional Labor Agency.
Defendant is entitled to receive unemployment benefits of KRW 4,821,080 in total five times from December 9, 2015 to April 7, 2016, which is believed to be true, from the high-class branch offices of the High-class Regional Labor Office which believe that the above false application for recognition of unemployment was made.
Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, received goods and received unemployment benefits by illegal means.
3. On the judgment of the court below, the court below held that the facts constituting the crime of the summary order and the facts charged of this case, which became final below, are all the crimes with a single comprehensive offense, prior to the issuance of the above summary order.