logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.11.19 2014고정89 (1)
직업안정법위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Reasons

Criminal facts

Defendant

A is the director of the Educational Institute of the E language Private Teaching Institutes on the 3rd floor in Ansan-si, the person who established and operates the school, the defendant F enters the Republic of Korea (D-2), the student enrolled in the fourth grade of the G University, the defendant H is a person who is staying in the capacity of visa exemption (B1) with the nationality of New Zealand.

1. On July 27, 2013, Defendant A did not employ a foreigner who does not have the status of sojourn eligible for employment in the “EEF Research Institute,” located in D3rd floor of Ansan-si, Seoul-si. However, Defendant A reported the job placement advertisement of the F and H, who were four arms, and were staying in the qualification for visa exemption (B1).

Defendant

A employs a student abroad who does not have the status of stay eligible for job-seeking activities (D-2) in F as a student abroad for 25,000 won per hour, and 30,000 won per hour for visa exemption (B1) as a student abroad English language instructor of the E language Institute, and, respectively, from July 29, 2013 to 14:00, A made the student abroad a lecture against the student abroad for 50 minutes.

2. Defendant B neglected to manage and supervise the above A’s business affairs and caused the above violation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of a witness I, and part of the witness J's legal statement;

1. The Defendants’ partial statement in the first trial record (the Defendants and their defense counsel asserted that Defendant A did not have employed F and H, but considering the following circumstances: (a) the demotion’s actual progress was part of the regular special lecture; and (b) Defendant A was also employed by the first investigative agency in the first trial record; (c) the Defendants and their defense counsel’s assertion is without merit).

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding F;

1. Statement to J police officers;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. The relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the defendant A who has chosen a punishment:

arrow