beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2017.05.26 2016고단996

근로기준법위반등

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is a user who has run the above restaurant by using eight full-time workers, as the actual representative of D in Sinpo City C, and who has operated the above restaurant.

(a) An employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act shall, if a worker retires, pay the wages, compensations, and any other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred, unless the employer has agreed on the extension of the payment deadline between the parties concerned;

Nevertheless, the Defendant paid KRW 40,50,000 out of the total amount of wages of E during the pertinent E period from June 21, 2012 to August 31, 2014, and did not pay the remainder of KRW 51,741,935 within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties on the extension of payment period.

(b) An employer who violates the Guarantee of Retirement Benefits for a worker shall, in cases where the worker retires, pay the retirement allowance within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred, unless the parties have agreed to extend the payment deadline;

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 7,523,225 of E’s retirement pay from June 21, 2012 to August 31, 2014, within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment deadline.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are premised on the retirement of E in the workplace where the Defendant had operated.

On the other hand, a business transfer refers to a company organized for a certain business purpose, i.e., a company that maintains its identity and transfers only a part of its business, which can be transferred to the company that takes over the business (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Du8455, Mar. 29, 2002). In light of the above legal principle, the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court is ①.