logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.08.28 2019고단1480
고용보험법위반
Text

Defendant

A, B, and C shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3 million for each of them, KRW 1 million for Defendant D, and KRW 10 million for Defendant E.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Relationship between the parties] Defendant A is the number of punishment E; Defendant B’s spouse; Defendant C is the worker employed by Defendant E; Defendant D is the person who actually runs the workplace F, G, H (representative himself, spouse, and mother).

【Criminal Facts】

No person shall receive maternity leave benefits and childcare leave benefits by fraud or other improper means.

Nevertheless, in collusion with Defendant E, Defendant A, B, C, and D applied for childcare leave benefits to the Seoul Mak Employment Center by fraud or other improper means, and received childcare leave unlawfully. A.

Defendant

A and E’s joint criminal offenders: (a) falsely registering Defendant A who has not actually worked as an employee of F at the workplace; (b) Defendant A was granted childcare leave from F at the workplace for 12 months; and (c) Defendant A her application for childcare leave benefits for six months or longer after the completion of childcare leave; and (d) Defendant A filed a false application for childcare leave benefits for 11 times in total at the Seoul Multimedia Employment Center; and (c) Defendant A received childcare leave benefits for 12,00,000,000 as shown in attached Table 1.

B. Defendant B and E’s joint criminal administration: (a) falsely registering Defendant B who did not actually have worked as a worker G at the workplace; and (b) assuming that Defendant B had been granted childcare leave from G at the workplace for 12 months, Defendant B took false documents as if they were used; and (c) Defendant B filed a false application for childcare leave at Seoul Seoul Mak Employment Center for a total of six times on the basis of this, and received the childcare leave amounting to KRW 3,600,000 as indicated in attached Table 2.

C. Defendant C and E’s co-principal continued to work for 12 months, even though Defendant C had been granted childcare leave at F at the workplace.

arrow