2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. From September 1, 2005 to May 31, 2012, the Plaintiff retired from office at the Busan National Academy of Sciences located in the Busan National Academy of Sciences, and thereafter, on June 12, 2012, upon receiving an application from the Defendant for recognition of eligibility for unemployment benefits (hereinafter “instant application”), and received payment of job-seeking benefits for 210 days in total from June 19, 2012 to January 14, 2013 (i.e., job-seeking benefits amounting to KRW 6,924,890 for 210 days (= job-seeking benefits amounting to KRW 32,976 x 210 days).

B. On June 12, 2012, the Defendant was informed of the Plaintiff’s illegal receipt of unemployment benefits and investigated the result, determined that the Plaintiff was employed in the “D coffee shop” located in Busan Shipping Daegu, Busan. On November 21, 2013, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to submit his opinion before the disposition, notifying the Plaintiff that he would be subject to the restriction on the payment of unemployment benefits, the order to return, and the additional collection.

C. On December 4, 2013, the Defendant examined the documents, such as the confirmation of facts submitted by the Plaintiff, E, etc., and issued a restriction on the payment of unemployment benefits, an order to return unemployment benefits, and an additional collection disposition (the sum of KRW 6,924,890 and the amount additionally collected KRW 13,849,780, which are the sum of KRW 6,924,890; hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for review with an employment insurance examiner on June 12, 2014. However, the Plaintiff again filed a request for review with the Employment Insurance Review Committee on September 5, 2014, but also rendered a decision of dismissal on October 22, 2014.

E. On November 5, 2014, the Plaintiff received a notice of dismissal of the said request for reexamination and filed the instant lawsuit on February 2, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 9, 10, 14, and 15, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition

A. The plaintiff's argument D coffee shop is a coffee shop operated by the plaintiff E, its branch since 2002, and the plaintiff is the above coffee shop.