근로기준법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., a fine of two million won) of the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. In the appellate court’s ex officio determination, the prosecutor added to the facts charged that “the defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with prison labor for habitual larceny, etc. at the Seoul Eastern District Court on February 12, 2019, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on July 12, 2019,” and applied for permission to amend an indictment to add “Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act” to the applicable provisions of law, and the court of appeal changed the subject of adjudication by granting permission to amend an indictment. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is a cause for ex officio reversal due to changes
Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.
3. The judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal as seen earlier, and it is again decided as follows.
[Grounds for the judgment of multiple court] The summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence admitted by this court is added to the judgment of the court below that "the defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with prison labor for habitual larceny, etc. at the Seoul Eastern District Court on February 12, 2019, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on July 12, 2019," and the summary of evidence is added to "1. judgment (Supreme Court Decision 2019Do7567), judgment (Seoul East Eastern District Court Decision 2019No329), judgment (Seoul East East District Court Decision 2019No329), judgment (Seoul East Eastern District Court Decision 2019No2658, 3964)" and the summary of evidence is as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, so it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
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. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;
1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37 and Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act are applicable;