1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Case history

A. On December 26, 2017, the Plaintiff applied for unemployment benefits to the Defendant on December 26, 2017, and filed an application therefor from January 2, 2018.

8. Until February 29, 200, the total number of 240 days of benefits was recognized. Since February 5, 2018, the company was an insurance solicitor of B Company from February 5, 2018, and only received unemployment benefits for 34 days out of the above 240 days.

B. On August 28, 2018, before the date of 12 months as an insurance solicitor of the Company B, the Plaintiff started a real estate business and started a lease business, and prepared a change of business to a real estate sales business on the 31st of the same month, including completing business registration.

C. The Plaintiff’s June 24, 2018, and the same year

7.3. & 4.0

8. 24. Each citizen newspaper company is both an insurance solicitor, real estate sales business, or business; thus, if the total sum of the business period exceeds 12 months, he/she may meet the payment criteria for early re-employment allowances under Article 84(1)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Employment Insurance Act.

As to the plaintiff's above inquiry, the defendant, July 3, 2018, and the same month.

6. and the same year;

8. On August 31, 2018, each citizen questioning and questioning sent an answer to the Plaintiff by mail on August 22, 2018.

(2) Of the above answers, “where a person runs a business” under Article 84(1)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Employment Insurance Act is limited to cases where a person reports the preparation activities to run a business in the given benefit period as a re-employment activity and reports the relevant business after obtaining the recognition of unemployment. As such, the relevant business reported as a result of re-employment activities is not conducted for at least 12 months and is engaged in a business after converting the business into a new business that is not entirely related to such business, the criteria for the payment of early re-employment allowances are not satisfied.

E. On September 14, 2018, the Plaintiff’s instant postal reply was erroneous for the Defendant.