Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant served as C’s instructor located on the Jeonjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City B 4th floor from January 10, 2014 to July 15, 2016.

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

On May 18, 2016, the Defendant submitted a false application for recognition of eligibility for benefits under the Employment Insurance Act and submitted a false application for recognition of eligibility for benefits from March 11, 2016 to September 21, 2016, and around 347,320 won around June 1, 2016, around 1, 205, 640 won around June 29, 2016, around 1, 201, 205, 640 won around July 27, 2016, and 1,215, 640 won around July 27, 2016, 640 won around 1, 200, 640 won around July 27, 2016, 1,640 won around 1, 205, 205, 160 won around 25, 2016;

Accordingly, the defendant received unemployment benefits by false means.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspects of D;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. (A), application for recognition of eligibility as a beneficiary (A), reporting of loss of eligibility as an employment insurance (A, D) and application of laws and subordinate statutes of the insured employment certificate (A);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts and Article 116 (2) of the Insurance Act on the selective employment of sentence (generally, selection of fines);

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

1. Although Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order is not less than a significant amount of fraudulent supply and demand for sentencing, the Defendant reported C instructors’ unemployment benefit supply and demand to the competent labor authority. During the investigation process, the Defendant’s wrongful supply and demand of the Plaintiff’s unemployment benefit was ordered to the pertinent labor authority, and the Defendant’s mistake was acknowledged as soon as possible by taking into account some favorable circumstances.