Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

No person shall receive unemployment benefits by fraud or other improper means.

Notwithstanding the fact that the Defendant received benefits while working as a cook at the “E” branch office of the Daejeon-gun D (Seoul-gun) from around June 13, 2016 to early August 2016, the Defendant was urged to resign from F on June 10, 2016 at the office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of Daegu-gu (430) located at 430 as of July 13, 2016, and was currently under employment status, and was unfairly recognized the eligibility to receive unemployment benefits, and received the eligibility to receive unemployment benefits from the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of Daegu-gu (hereinafter referred to as the “E”), under the pretext of unemployment benefits.

As a result, the Defendant received a total of KRW 4,167,610 in total on five occasions.

Summary of Evidence

In light of the fact that the defendant's investigation report on the police's statement protocol H in relation to the interrogation protocol G of the defendant's statutory statement D (hereinafter "Ethy investigation report"), investigation report (related to the witness I), investigation report (related to the account of the suspect I), investigation report (report attached to the application for recognition of unemployment of the suspect A), investigation report (report attached to the investigation report on August 6, 2016), investigation report (Attachment to the application for recognition of demand and supply), investigation report (Attachment to the application for recognition of demand and supply), and each attached document related to the criminal facts subject to the applicable law of the suspect A and Article 116 (2) of the Act on the Insurance of the Selection of the Punishment of the Criminal Procedure (Penalty Selection), Article 70 (1) and Article 69 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on the Provisional Payment Order"), the sentencing system of this case is operated by the State as an unlawful means to stabilize the livelihood of the defendant.