However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

(e).

The defendant is the representative of H in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, who is engaged in construction business by employing 40 full-time workers.

The Defendant, from December 25, 2012 to April 1, 2014, did not pay KRW 1,178,730,00 from the date of retirement to 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment deadline.

In addition, the Defendant’s details of the arrears (H), except for the part on C, D, E, and F, the remainder of 87,940,615 won in the column of “other” clause 77,977,56, and the remainder of 4,519,655 won in the column of “retirement gold” clause 3,75,576 won, and the remainder of 92,460,270 won in the aggregate amount of 81,73,142 won, respectively.

The amount equivalent to KRW 81,733,142 in total shall not be paid within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement between the parties on the extension of payment dates, such as the statement.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A written protocol concerning the examination of the prosecution and the police against the accused;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. The defendant and the defense counsel concluded the so-called comprehensive wage contract with the worker in this case that a certain amount of wages, including the annual leave allowance, paid leave allowance, overtime work allowance, holiday work allowance, and holiday work allowance, as they concluded the so-called comprehensive wage contract with the worker in this case that the worker in this case should pay a certain amount of wages as a day-to-day, such as each written appeal, a statement of payment of daily leave allowance, each investigation report, statistics on stations, written opinions, each opinion, retirement allowance, total amount of retirement allowance, vindication, and record [1. The defendant and the defense counsel stated that there is no reason to pay the worker in addition to the annual leave allowance and unpaid retirement allowance. However, the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court is comprehensive.