근로자퇴직급여보장법위반
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the Defendant, a full-time employee, who is the C representative in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, who runs beauty business (HH design) by using one full-time employee.
When a worker retires, an employer shall pay the retirement allowance within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred.
Defendant did not pay KRW 4,421,191 of D retirement pay at the same place of business from March 17, 2016 to October 12, 2017, as well as KRW 6,968,982 of E’s total amount of retirement pay of KRW 2,547,791, and two retirement allowances from January 13, 2016 to June 30, 2017, without agreement on the extension of the payment date between the parties concerned.
2. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under the main sentence of Article 44 and Article 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s will specifically manifested pursuant to the proviso of Article 44 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits.
According to the records, the victim D and E prepared a written withdrawal of complaint that they agreed with the defendant on March 14, 2018 and that they do not want to be punished against the defendant, and submitted it to the court on May 18, 2018, which was after the prosecution of this case, and expressed their intention not to be punished against the defendant.
Therefore, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.