However, from the date of the conclusion of the judgment, each of the above two years against the Defendants.

Defendant

A serves as the representative director of the victim E company, who is a commercial E company from March 8, 2011, and the defendant G is a person in charge of overall accounting management while working as a director in charge of finance of the victim who is a commercial E company from January 8, 2005.

In E, there was no person who received interim payment of retirement allowances from officers including directors until before the transfer, and there was a duty to pay interim payment of retirement allowances according to the E's rules of payment of retirement allowances for executive officers after the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders under the articles of incorporation.

On May 23, 2011, the Defendants conspired and failed to comply with the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders or the rules on the payment of retirement allowances for officers in violation of their duties at the fourth floor E office of the Seoul Daejeon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Office for the fourth floor of the F building. Defendant G paid money to Defendant A for interim settlement of retirement allowances as the need for personal investment in the financial products of the company, i.e., “S. S. S. S. S. C”, and Defendant A submitted an interim settlement of retirement allowances as the interim settlement of retirement allowances. Defendant A approved this, and Defendant G paid KRW 50 million to Defendant G for interim settlement of retirement allowances, thereby causing property damage equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Defendant G’s partial legal statement

1. Each legal statement of the witness A Q in each part;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. The police statement concerning R;

1. Final reports and articles of incorporation of E Special Audit Co., Ltd. (E Co.);

1. Defendant G asserts that Defendant G, as an employee under the Labor Standards Act, made an interim settlement of the retirement allowance as part of the registered matters, and the written response to an order to submit a statement of submission.

Whether a worker is a worker under the Labor Standards Act is in substance provided work to an employer for the purpose of wages regardless of the form of contract.