근로기준법위반등
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, as a manager of the C Company B located in the Jung-gu, Seosan-gu, Gyeonggi-si, the Defendant is an employer who runs the manufacturing business of anti-verversive season by employing two regular workers.
The Defendant had worked from April 1, 2008 to November 1, 2014 at the same place of business, and paid KRW 2,274,255 on August 8, 2014; KRW 3,750,00 on September 1, 2014; KRW 3,750,00 on October 1, 2014; and KRW 9,774,255 on October 1, 2014, within 14 days from the date of retirement, without any agreement between the parties on extension of the due date.
B. The Defendant did not pay KRW 9,708,90 of D retirement pay from April 1, 2008 to November 1, 2014, and KRW 6,310,650 of E retirement pay from October 1, 2010 to March 1, 2014, within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement between the parties on extension of the due date.
2. According to Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, the violation of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits is a case in which a public prosecution cannot be instituted against the express intent of each victim under the proviso to Article 44 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits.
However, according to the records, the victim E withdraws his/her wish to punish each Defendant on February 2, 2015, which was after the prosecution of this case, and on March 20, 2015, the victim D, after the prosecution of this case, can be acknowledged.
Therefore, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act since the victim withdraws his/her wish to punish a case which cannot be prosecuted against the clearly expressed will of the victim.