Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months, by a fine of 4,500,000 won.

However, the defendant A.

Criminal facts

1. If a foreigner A intends to be employed in the Republic of Korea, he/she shall obtain the status of sojourn eligible for employment activities, and no person shall employ a foreigner who has no status of sojourn eligible for legitimate employment activities;

Defendant

A around June 25, 2012, around 2012, at the business place of a stock company B located in Sungsung-si, in Indonesia D (E), F (G) in Indonesia, H (Is, Inn), the Philippines, J (K, Inn), L (M), N (M), P (O), R (S (S), TU (Us), and employed each for simple labor, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant employed a foreigner who has no status of stay to engage in legitimate job-seeking activities.

2. Defendant B Co., Ltd. committed the same act of violation as set forth in paragraph (1) at the time of its business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Statement of the police concerning V;

1. A written accusation;

1. A certificate of foreign employment;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each statement;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Article 94 Subparag. 9 of the Immigration Control Act and Article 18 (3) of the same Act (Selection of Imprisonment);

(b) Defendant B: Each of the Immigration Control Act subparagraph 2, Article 99-3 subparagraph 9, Article 94 subparagraph 9, and Article 18 (3) of the Immigration Control Act (Selection of Fines);

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes (defendants) Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. As to Defendant A with the reason for the suspended sentence (see, e.g., Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “the reason for the suspended sentence”), consideration is given to the following: (a) the above Defendant’s mistake is divided; (b) the said Defendant’s primary offender is the person in charge of practice; (c) the actual employer of a foreign worker is the person in charge of practice; and (d) there are circumstances that may be considered in the course of committing the instant crime; (b) the instant crime was committed by Defendant A, the former representative director; and (c) around November 2012, Defendant A’s business operation