logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.09.10 2015고단2157
출입국관리법위반
Text

1. Defendant A shall be punished by a fine of 5,000,000 won;

Defendant

A. The above fines are imposed against A.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A Co., Ltd. is a corporation established mainly for the purpose of manufacturing and selling the rubber of automobile parts and solid containers in Gyeonggi Culture Co., Ltd., and Defendant B is a person who works as the representative director of the above A.

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

1. Defendant B

A. The Defendant employed D (D, Esss, and males) who is an Philippines that did not have the status of stay eligible for employment in the manufacturing industry under the above A, on the condition that monthly remuneration of KRW 1,250,000 from September 8, 201 to June 2, 2015.

B. From August 13, 2013 to June 2, 2015, the Defendant employed Vietnam F (F, G students, women) who did not have the status of stay eligible for employment in the manufacturing industry in the above A, on condition that the Defendant paid KRW 1.2 million monthly remuneration from August 13, 2013 to June 2, 2015.

C. The Defendant employed H (H, I and males) as a Thailand who did not have the status of stay eligible for employment in the manufacturing industry in the above A, on the condition that the Defendant would pay KRW 900,000 monthly remuneration from May 1, 2015 to June 2, 2015.

The Defendant employed the J (J, K, and Women) as a condition that the Defendant would pay monthly remuneration of KRW 1080,000,000 from May 1, 2015 to June 2, 2015.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the Immigration Control Act.

2. The Defendant Company A, as indicated in the above Paragraph (1), employed four foreigners who were the representative director of the Defendant and did not have the status of sojourn eligible for employment activities regarding the Defendant’s business as employees, and violated the Immigration Control Act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A written employment statement;

1. Each accusation;

1. Each notice of decision on examining an immigration offender;

1. Registration as A;

1. Application of statutes on business registration certificates;

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

(a) A: Subparagraph 2 of Article 99-3 of the Immigration Control Act, Article 94 subparagraph 9 of the same Act; and

arrow