A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

No person shall employ any foreigner who has no status of sojourn eligible for employment activities.

Nevertheless, around August 10, 2016, the Defendant employed 12 foreigners who did not have the status of stay as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table, including employing Vietnamese nationality D who did not have the status of stay to engage in construction business and to engage in job-seeking activities in North-gu C at a port of port on August 10, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Accusation of an immigration offender, each decision on review of and a written notice on his/her suspicion, a report on acknowledgement of suspected suspicion, a list of illegal foreigners, a written confirmation on employment of foreigners, each written statement, inquiries about comprehensive records of immigration-related persons, the details of attendance, and the application

1. Article 94 subparagraph 9 of the relevant Act and Article 18 (3) of the Immigration Control Act regarding criminal facts and the selection of punishment;

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. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, which employs a foreigner who does not have the status of sojourn eligible for employment activities, is likely to deprive the foreigner having the status of sojourn with the foreigner having the status of sojourn, and cause various social problems due to the disturbance in management of the foreigner staying in the Republic of Korea.

However, there are circumstances that may be considered in the course of committing the instant crime, such as the fact that the Defendant has already divided his mistake in depth, the fact that the failure of the employee would result in the instant crime, the period during which the Defendant employed a foreigner who did not have the status of sojourn eligible for employment activities is relatively short, and the Defendant has no record of committing the crime exceeding the fine, etc., together with various favorable circumstances for the Defendant.