When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The Defendant is operating a funeral in the name of “C” in Masan-si.

On May 1, 2015, when the Defendant intends to employ a foreigner at the same workplace, he/she should employ a person who has obtained the status of stay that allows him/her to engage in employment activities in the Republic of Korea from that time to June 20, 2017, the Defendant employed D and E (n) at the intervals of 130-1.4 million won per month from that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each written statement D or E (Evidence No. 10, 11 pages);

1. A certificate of employment of foreigners (seven pages of evidence records);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on accusation of an immigration offender (the fourth page of evidence record);

1. Article 94 subparagraph 9 of the relevant Act and Article 18 (3) of the Immigration Control Act (excluding punishment) concerning facts constituting an offense;

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;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act reflects the defendant's mistake, the primary offender, the number and employment period of the employed foreigners, the size of the place of business operated by the defendant, the age, environment, details of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be determined as ordered by taking into account all the sentencing conditions specified in the argument of this case, including the following: