Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

The defendant is the representative of the C Hospital in Gyeyang-gu Incheon, who employs 134 full-time workers and operates the hospital.

The Defendant, from November 20, 2015 to November 18, 2016, did not pay the annual paid leave (11 day) of the intention of his withdrawal during the above period from the above hospital within 14 days from the date of his retirement, without agreement on the extension of the payment deadline.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant in part in the first trial record;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and E;

1. To state some of the statements of the accused in the protocol of interrogation of the suspect against the accused by the prosecution;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel asserted to the effect that a judgment dismissing a public prosecution should be rendered on the ground that the defendant's labor contract, application for change of status, Internet transfer results, inquiry, resignation, and inquiry of facts (the defendant and his/her defense counsel shall prepare and submit a statement of withdrawal of petition indicating the defendant's intention to punish the defendant to the labor supervisor who is a special judicial police officer, and that the defendant and his/her defense counsel expressed his/her intention not to punish the defendant

However, in the crime of non-violation of intention, the injured person has expressed his wish not to punish or withdrawn his wishing to punish.

In order for recognition, the victim’s true intent should be expressed in a way that enables clear and belief (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do4934, Jun. 25, 2004). Comprehensively taking into account evidence, such as the witness E’s legal statement and statement of inquiry about facts (the branch office of the North Korean branch office of the Incheon Regional Labor Agency of the Jung-gu Office of Employment and Labor, Incheon), the victim’s intention was expressed in a way that is obvious and reliable

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument. The application of the law

1. Article 109(1) and 36 of the pertinent Act and the former Labor Standards Act (amended by Act No. 15108, Nov. 28, 2017); the selection of fines for criminal facts;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69 of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse.