1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff asserted that he/she worked in B (hereinafter “B”) from October 25, 2010, while leaving his/her job on March 16, 2015, and applied for recognition of eligibility for employment insurance to the Defendant on or around the 23th of the same month.

B. On March 23, 2015, the Plaintiff recognized the Defendant’s entitlement to KRW 150 days for the fixed benefit payment, KRW 43,000 for the job-seeking benefits, and KRW 3,225,00 for 75 days from March 30, 2015 to June 12, 2015, and KRW 4,837,50 for early re-employment benefits.

C. On December 27, 2016, the Defendant received a report to the effect that 11 employees, including the Plaintiff, worked in B and received unemployment benefits as if they were retired, and began an investigation after receiving the report to the effect that the unemployment benefits are unlawfully received. On April 25, 2017, the Defendant requested the investigation to the Busan East East Police Station.

On November 2, 2017, the Yongsan-dong Police Station notified the defendant that the case against the plaintiff should be forwarded to the prosecution as "suspension of reference" opinion, and the defendant should take necessary measures, such as restitution, etc.

E. On December 22, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff received job-seeking benefits by fraud or other improper means, the Defendant rendered a decision to restrict the payment of unemployment benefits, to order the Plaintiff to return job-seeking benefits and early re-employment allowances to KRW 4,837,50, and to additionally collect an amount equivalent to the same amount.

(f) On February 26, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a request for review of the instant disposition with an employment insurance examiner, but was dismissed on May 16, 2018. On August 13, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination with the Employment Insurance Review Committee, but was dismissed on September 19, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 12, each entry of evidence Nos. 17 through 19, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On March 16, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that he/she prepared for the establishment of a company by actually withdrawing from the office in B, by obtaining an office or by extracting employees, and then preparing for the establishment of a company on June 13, 2015.