Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

If a foreigner intends to be employed in the Republic of Korea, he/she shall obtain the qualification for sojourn eligible for employment activities, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and no person shall employ any person who does not have the qualification for sojourn.

The Defendant employed 5 foreigners who were operating “C Maz” in Nam-gu, Ulsan-si, and were not qualified to engage in job-seeking activities, such as entry in the list of crimes, from May 11, 2016 to June 14, 2016, including employment of D of the fatherland’s nationality who did not have the status of sojourn eligible for visa exemption (B1) and who did not have the status of sojourn eligible for job-seeking activities, from around May 11, 2016 to June 14, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written accusation;

1. A certificate of employment of foreigners;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a notice of decision on examining an immigration offender;

1. Article 94 subparagraph 9 of the relevant Act and Article 18 (3) of the Immigration Control Act, the selection of fines for criminal facts, and the selection of penalties;

1. Subsequent to Article 37 of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes: Provided, That Article 39 (1) of the same Act (limited to a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Acts, such as Intermediation of Commercial Sex Acts, No. 4007, which has become final and conclusive in this court), and a violation of the Medical Service Act and a violation of each immigration control Act as stated in the judgment);

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

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Criminal Procedure Act, Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which became final and conclusive in the judgment on the grounds of sentencing, took into account the equity between the offense of violating the Act on the Punishment of Acts, such as sexual traffic brokerage (such as sexual traffic brokerage, etc.) and the offense of violating the Medical Service Act at the same time, and the offense of violating each of the Immigration Control Act as stated in the judgment.