Defendants shall be punished by each fine of KRW 2,000,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, 100.

1. Defendant A is a director of P Co., Ltd., the main business of which is assembly of communications equipment, etc. at the Won-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City P, and Defendant B is a management director of the foregoing company.

The Defendants, in collusion with Q Q and R, who were reinstated to P, had Q, Q and R applied for false unemployment benefits to the Employment Support Center as if Q and R were in a de facto position, received unemployment benefits from the victims of 8,877,530 won through 13 times, such as the list of crimes in the attached Table (7), and (8), and received unemployment benefits by fraud or other improper means.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ partial statement

1. The witness Q, R, S, and T’s legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the insured status deprivation report (23 list of evidence), the certificate of severance from employment of the insured (24 list of evidence), the details of unemployment benefits payment (27 list of evidence), the declaration of disqualification (28 list of evidence), the certificate of severance from employment of the insured (29 list of evidence), a copy of passbook (30 list of evidence);

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (a comprehensive fraud by each unemployment benefit contractor), Article 116(2) of the Employment Insurance Act, and Article 30 of the Criminal Act for the facts of the crime (a point of illegal receipt of unemployment benefits by combining them for each unemployment benefit contractor);

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act for the ordinary concurrences;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for detention in a workhouse;

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, of the provisional payment order

1. Facts charged;

A. In order to lower the burden of retirement benefits to be paid to a worker who has worked in the above company for more than one year, the Defendants were willing to report false grounds for retirement to the worker instead of receiving retirement benefits less than one year, and suggesting the worker to receive unemployment benefits.

Defendant

A makes a proposal to D and 10 other than D who retired while serving in the above company as above.