Defendant

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

Defendant

A is a person who actually operates "B" corporation located in Dong-gu, Nam-gu, Dong-gu, Seoul, and the defendant corporation B is a corporation established for the purpose of manufacturing agricultural and livestock machinery.

In employing foreigners, the Defendants could not employ a person who does not have the status of sojourn eligible for employment as prescribed by the Immigration Control Act. However, the Defendants employed three employees, including D, etc., who were born illegally staying from May 11, 2014 to July 2, 2014.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Each statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the written accusation;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

A. Defendant A: Article 94 Subparag. 9 of the Immigration Control Act, Article 18(3) of the Immigration Control Act, the selection of fines

B. Defendant B: Article 99-3 subparag. 2, Article 94 subparag. 9, and Article 18(3) of the Immigration Control Act; selection of fines

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act or more.