2. The Defendant appears to have recognized the instant crime and against his mistake.

In addition, the Defendant, as the contractor of the instant construction, employed the daily workers (seven persons, such as D, etc.) and continued the said construction, was unable to receive the construction cost corresponding to the excessive period from the contractor due to the wind exceeding the scheduled period of construction.

Furthermore, the fact that the above workers received some of the unpaid wages (5 million won out of about 19 million won) from the contractor, that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment heavier than the suspended execution, and that the defendant's health status is not good, etc. are considered favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is not paid within 14 days from the date of retirement even though there was no agreement on the extension of the due date for the payment of wages of the above worker employed by the defendant employed by the defendant to the construction of this case, and the illegality of the act is not weak.

In addition, considering the fact that the total amount of unpaid wages of the above workers exceeds about 19 million won, the remaining 14 million won has not yet been paid, and other circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the punishment determined by the court below is too unreasonable.

The defendant's ground of appeal cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.