The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant is running a textile processing company B, which runs the textile processing business.

When any person intends to employ a foreigner, he/she shall employ a person holding the status of sojourn eligible for employment, and shall not employ an illegal foreigner.

Nevertheless, for two months from October 10, 2012 to December 12, 2012, the Defendant entered into a visa for non-professional employment (E-9) to B Co., Ltd. located in Gyeonggi Yang-si Co., Ltd. in the Gyeonggi Yang-si, and the period of stay expires, and did not hold the status of stay eligible for employment, and made the Defendant packed the goods by employing D and E students.

2. We examine the judgment. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Articles 94 subparag. 9 and 18(3) of the Immigration Control Act, and where an immigration offender falls under Article 101(1) of the same Act, a public prosecution cannot be instituted unless the head of the office, the head of the branch office, or the head of the foreigner internment camp files an accusation. As to the facts charged in the instant case, there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that the head of the office, the head of the branch office, or the head

Therefore, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.