Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Defendant

17 persons such as misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are not those employed by Defendant A, but those who have entered into a subcontract with Defendant A.

Therefore, the fact that Defendant A did not pay to 17 others such as K is not the wage but the construction cost.

Article 44-2(1) of the Labor Standards Act, not Article 44-2(1), but Article 44-2(2) shall be applied to the

Defendant

There are a few number of employees who have not paid wages, and the total amount of unpaid wages is not much.

However, the attitude of the defendant to recognize and reflect the crime seems to be.

The judgment below

In the first instance after a sentence, part of the workers do not want the punishment in withdrawal of the defendant's petition.

In addition, considering all of the sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and the background of the crime in this case, the punishment sentenced by the court below is too inappropriate.

Defendant’s assertion is with merit.

Defendant

Comprehensively taking account of the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly examined by the court below as to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to B, 17 members K, etc. are employees employed by Defendant A as recognized by the court below.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

Article 44-2(1) of the Labor Standards Act shall apply to the facts constituting the instant crime.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

The number of employees who have not been paid wages is small and the total amount of unpaid wages is small.

The defendant still does not recognize the crime.

However, when the judgment of the court below was rendered, part of the workers do not want punishment when withdrawing the petition against Defendant A.

Pursuant to Articles 109(1) and 44-2(1) of the Labor Standards Act.