Provided, That each of the above punishments shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Defendant A is a business owner who employs 12 full-time workers as the P representative director of the Co., Ltd. and operates R in Q Q in Seo-gu Daejeon.

The Defendant, from August 16, 201 to December 6, 2011, paid 120,95,000 won in total, as indicated in the attached Table Nos. 12 to 32, to 21 workers, such as S, who worked at the R remodeling construction site operated by the said P Co., Ltd. from around August 16, 201 to December 6, 201, within 14 days from each retirement date.

2. On August 201, Defendant B entered into a delegation contract to the effect that the completion of R remodeling works with P Co., Ltd. on or around August 2011, and performed as a general manager of R remodeling works on behalf of the business owner on matters concerning workers at the said construction site.

The Defendant, from August 16, 201 to December 6, 2011, paid 120,95,000 won in total, as indicated in the attached Table Nos. 12 to 32, to 21 workers, such as S, who worked at the R remodeling construction site operated by the said P Co., Ltd. from around August 16, 201 to December 6, 201, within 14 days from each retirement date.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant B’s statement in the second trial record;

1. Each police statement on T, S, U, V, W, and X;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a subcontract construction contract to each individual, a detailed statement of delayed payment, a detailed statement of overdue wages, a work day report, a detailed statement of daily wages, unpaid statements, and application

1. Article 109 (1) and Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act applicable to the crimes and Articles 109 (1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the grounds for sentencing), Defendant A gave a contract for the instant remodelling work to the Defendant B, and paid all the construction cost. As such, the workers indicated in the facts charged are not the workers employed by the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant is not liable to the Defendant.