The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

There is no fact that the defendant conducted free job placement services, such as mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and incomplete hearing.

It is only one time that the phone number of the job seeker was informed by the phone call for the employee at the instant secondary management shop.

Therefore, although Defendant’s act cannot be seen as free job placement service under the Employment Security Act, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby convicted Defendant of the facts charged.

The punishment sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

Article 48 subparag. 1 of the Employment Security Act provides a punishment for the conduct of free job placement services without filing a report under Article 48 subparag. 1 of the relevant legal principles concerning determination of mistake, misunderstanding of legal principles, and incomplete hearing. The term "free job placement services" means job placement services conducted without receiving fees, membership fees, or any other money or valuables, and the term "job placement services" means arranging employment contracts between job offerers and job seekers by searching job seekers or job offerers or recruiting job seekers at the request

(Article 2-2 of the Employment Security Act). On the other hand, the term "job placement service" is a continuous job placement service with continuous intention, and it is an act conducted with intent to continue repeatedly even if a single act is not required to do so in reality.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do5025 Decided December 14, 2001, etc.). The defendant asserts that the defendant only received telephone numbers from those who wish to provide job offering or to obtain job seeking and informing them to each other. However, since there are no restrictions on the contents and methods of recruiting job offerers and job seekers or arranging the formation of the employment contract, the above acts recognized by the defendant are also job offerers and job seekers.