근로기준법위반등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court dismissed the public prosecution against the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the Guarantee of Wage for Workers’ Retirement, and convicted each of the remaining facts charged. Since only the Defendant appealed against the guilty portion among the lower judgment, the dismissed portion of the public prosecution for which the Defendant and the Prosecutor did not appeal was separated and finalized as it is.
Therefore, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the conviction part of the judgment below.
The gist of the Defendant’s appeal is as follows: (a) although the part of the order to pay the amount equivalent to the wages during the period of dismissal, which was invalidated as of May 31, 2014, of the instant order for remedy, became invalid; (b) the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment; (c) the sentence (five million won penalty) declared by the lower court was too unreasonable.
The effect of the part ordering the payment of the amount equivalent to the wages during the period of dismissal, among the relief order of this case finalized on April 5, 2014, was later retired.
Since it is not lost on the other hand, there is no ground for misunderstanding the legal principles of the prior defendant on the other premise.
However, considering the fact that the defendant paid 5 million won to E in the name of the amount equivalent to the wages during the period of dismissal, etc. after the crime of this case, and other various circumstances, which are the conditions of sentencing as shown in this case, the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant, is unreasonable, and thus, the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing is justified.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.
Criminal facts
The defendant is the representative of D in Jeju City C and underground floor, who ordinarily employs seven full-time workers and operates indoor construction business.
An employer shall issue a remedy order to the Regional Labor Relations Commission.