A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On September 17, 2008, the Defendant entered the Republic of Korea with a visa for non-professional employment (E-9) and went into the Republic of Korea and went into the Republic of Korea on July 12, 2013, and went into the Republic of Pakistan.

On December 2, 2017, the Defendant knew that he wanted to re-enter the Republic of Korea, but was unable to enter the Republic of Korea in a normal way, and attempted to enter the Republic of Korea with a visa issued via an immigration intermediary.

On December 2, 2017, the Defendant: (a) requested, at the end of Pakistan, from the end of the period of entry into and departure from the Republic of Korea, C with a visa of approximately KRW 7 million for entry into the Republic of Korea; (b) the Defendant’s passport and/or photographic photo; (c) the Defendant’s passport and/or authenticated photograph; and (d) the Defendant’s passport and/or authenticated photograph to F operating “E”, a seller of textile machinery, through a textile company of Pakistan’s “D”, was sent a visa as if the Defendant had no plan to receive technology transfer from “E” as an employee of “E”, while the Defendant was aware that he would receive technology transfer; and (d) received necessary invitations, etc. for obtaining a visa.

In other words, the above F was sent by the invitation of the horse, etc. on December 2017.

On January 5, 2018, C applied for a short-term visit visa (C-3) to the Defendant at the Embassy of the Republic of Pakistanan Republic of Korea located in Pakistan on January 5, 2018, and submitted a visa issuance document, such as a false invitation letter, to the effect that the public official in charge of issuing the visa is inviting the Defendant to transfer his/her technology, C applied for a false visa and obtained the visa from the said Embassy in a fraudulent manner.

Accordingly, in collusion with C, the Defendant applied for a visa in collusion with C at the same time as interfering with the legitimate execution of duties by a public official in charge of issuing visas belonging to the Embassy of the Republic of Pakistan.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. Subparagraph 3 of Article 94 of the Immigration Control Act and subparagraph 2 of Article 7-2 of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense (application for a false visa) and the Criminal Act.