근로자퇴직급여보장법위반
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
1. The Defendant, as the representative director of the D Co., Ltd. located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-si, the instant facts charged, is an employer who ordinarily employs 13 workers and engages in issuing telephone number copies. The Defendant is a practical employer who ordinarily employs 15 workers and engages in issuing telephone number copies by employing 15 workers.
An employer shall, where a worker retires, pay a retirement allowance within 14 days from the date on which the grounds for such payment occurred, and where in special circumstances exist, the payment date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties concerned.
Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay the retirement pay of the employee I who retired from office from around October 5, 201 to December 31, 2014 to the said D Co., Ltd. 7,04,760 won of G retirement pay, from January 14, 2013 to May 10, 2015 of H’s retirement pay 4,602,270 won, and from November 20, 2006 to March 18, 2015 to the said F Co., Ltd. 9,210,478 won, and from January 4, 2010 to June 14, 2015, the Defendant did not pay the total amount of retirement pay from the said D Co., Ltd. to the said F Co., Ltd. 45, 205, including retirement pay from the said D Co., Ltd. to the said F Co., Ltd. 45, 2015.
2. Determination
(a) applicable law - Article 44 Subparag. 1 and Article 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act;
(b) Offense of Non-Punishment for Workers - the proviso to Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act
(c) Declaration of non-existence of punishment after public prosecution: Submission of a self-agreement on January 17, 2017;
(d) Judgment dismissing a public prosecution: Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act;