1. On February 24, 2014, the Defendant issued an order to return the unemployment benefits amounting to KRW 998,080,000 to the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 16, 2013, the Plaintiff retired from the New Annannany Co., Ltd., Ltd., and on December 27, 2013, upon applying for recognition of eligibility for employment insurance to the Defendant, the Plaintiff recognized eligibility for benefits of KRW 150 days for the fixed benefit payment and KRW 35,645.88, and was paid KRW 1,283,240 as follows from January 10 to February 7, 2014.

The date of application (the date of recognition of unemployment) for the period subject to the recognition of unemployment (the date of the original decision) shall be the sum of 1,283,240 on January 3, 2014 from January 10, 2014 to January 10, 2014; January 285, 2014; January 2, 2016; January 2, 2014 from January 11, 2014 to February 7, 2014; 98,080 on February 7, 2014; 1,283,240

B. On February 24, 2014, the Defendant issued an order to return job-seeking benefits amount of KRW 998,080 (the amount illegally received, KRW 71,290, KRW 926,790) that was illegally received during the second period subject to unemployment recognition pursuant to Article 62 of the Employment Insurance Act and Article 104 Subparag. 2 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act on the grounds that the Plaintiff received job-seeking benefits without filing a report, on February 6, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff was employed in Korea Comprehensive Management Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”).

C. On March 31, 2014, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and requested an examination to an employment insurance examiner, but was dismissed on May 15, 2014. On August 4, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination with the Employment Insurance Review Committee, but was dismissed on September 24, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On February 6, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff worked for the instant company on a daily basis. As such, the Plaintiff’s actual illegal receipt of job-seeking benefits is merely a one-day job-seeking benefits, but the Plaintiff’s return of the total amount of KRW 98,080 received during the period subject to recognition of unemployment to the second degree of job-seeking benefits was unlawful.

B. Determination of relevant statutes attached to relevant statutes

(c) judgment 1.