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

The defendant is a person who has operated a D convenience store in Si of Gyeongsan.

The Defendant filed an accusation against his employee E on the grounds that he did not reach the statutory minimum wage, and received a request for attendance at the relevant Daegu Regional Labor Office.

On July 20, 2017, around 13:30, the Defendant insultd the victim G who is the mother of E by openly referring to “dominate” in the 231 Daegu-gu Seoul-gu Seoul-gu Seoul-gu Seoul-gu Office for Labor Improvement of the second floor working hours. In addition, there are various labor supervisors, such as F, and civil petitioners, the Defendant told the victim G who is the mother of E as “Dominar.”

Summary of Evidence

1. A witness G or F’s legal statement;

1. The statement to the effect that: (a) the victim knew of the fact that he/she was aware of the fact that he/she was living together with the goods of the convenience store in the operation of the defendant, and (b) the victim, who appears to be a family member E, took video products containing the goods in a household, and the victim, etc. whose she was a mother, in CCTV at a convenience store; and (c) the police station in the process of investigating the case, made a statement to the effect that “(E) family members are fake and stolen.”

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of the police statement protocol to G;

1. Relevant laws and the choice of punishment for criminal facts. Article 311 of the Criminal Act (Optional to Penalty)

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 70(1) and Article 69(2)1 of the Criminal Act, which is the charge of litigation costs, were accused of violating the minimum wage law, etc., and the Defendant was convicted of the “domination” of the convenience store goods of E and the victim.

There is a motive for the defendant to speak as the "hyth" of "hys" toward the victim.

As a labor supervisor, the F, who is difficult to find the reasons for perjury unfavorable to the defendant, stated to the effect that it conforms to the facts charged in this law.

Even if a statement is made at the time of the police investigation of the defendant, the date and place specified in the facts charged shall be damaged.