근로기준법위반
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Punishment of the crime
The defendant is a representative director of D Construction in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, who runs a construction business using 20 full-time workers.
When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money and valuables within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred.
Provided, That in special circumstances, the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties.
Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 4,100,00,000, total of the F working hours from November 25, 2017 to December 25, 2017, as wages of KRW 600,000, and wages of KRW 3,500,000 on December 2017, as well as KRW 4,10,00,00 from the date of retirement, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the statement which is authentic to F;
1. Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the former Labor Standards Act (amended by Act No. 15108, Nov. 28, 2017); the choice of fines for criminal facts;
1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant did not pay KRW 11,419,354, including the total of KRW 11,454,00,00 from June 1, 2017 to May 11, 2018, as indicated in the facts charged as indicated in the judgment, within 14 days from the date of retirement, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment date.
2. This part of the facts charged is an offense falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the former Labor Standards Act (amended by Act No. 15108, Nov. 28, 2017) and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act.
However, the defendant around December 12, 2018, which was after the public prosecution of this case was instituted by the worker B.