1. The defendant A is not guilty. 2. Imprisonment with prison labor for six months for the defendant B.

except that this judgment.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B as the head of I branch office of F-F Association HW HG H HW, a person who is engaged in the business of recommending the employment of a bus engineer of I Co., Ltd., and Defendant C and Defendant D are those who work as an urban bus engineer in I Co., Ltd., and Defendant E are those who work as a community bus engineer in J Co., Ltd.

1. On September 3, 2015, Defendant B received an illegal solicitation from Defendant B to the effect that “M, who is an operator of ready-mixed, is employed as an I-city bus engineer first of all other applicants, as an I-city bus engineer in the hospital of “LSA” located in K on September 17:40, 2015, and received a cash of five million won in return.”

2. No person who is accused C shall intervene in the employment of another person for profit, unless otherwise prescribed by any Act;

Nevertheless, on February 1, 201, the Defendant was working as a cross-country bus driver from the alleyway near N around February 1, 2011.

In response to the request, “a request to arrange for employment as a stock company I” from theO, “a request to arrange for employment as a stock company I,” the aboveO received cash of KRW 1 million from that time to September 20, 2012 from that time, including the receipt of cash of KRW 1 million from that time, and received a total of KRW 10,100,000 from that time to September 20, 2012, and participated in the employment of theO by soliciting regular management A of the company I to employ theO.

This part of the facts charged by the prosecutor is "the involvement in the employment of the O and the benefit of the intermediary."

However, the act of a third party affecting the establishment or renewal of labor relations by introducing or arranging another person's employment for profit constitutes "an act of taking advantage of interest as an intermediary" rather than "an act of taking advantage of another person's employment for profit" (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3192, Aug. 23, 2007). The overall purport of facts charged is that the defendant involved in the employment of another person for profit.