근로기준법위반등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two months of imprisonment with prison labor and two years of suspended sentence) is too uneased.
2. The fact that the amount of wages and retirement allowances that the defendant did not pay to the defendant is not significant, and the fact that it seems that the workers suffered serious economic difficulties, etc. are considered to be disadvantageous to the defendant.
On the other hand, it is against the defendant's recognition of all of his criminal acts, the fact that the defendant is the first offender who has no criminal records, the fact that the defendant is a first offender with no criminal records, and the fact that the management of the business of this case led to the crime of this case. The defendant was indicted for the criminal facts against 12 workers, but the defendant expressed his intention that 5 workers do not want to further punish the defendant. The fact that 3 workers who currently want to punish the defendant is favorable to the defendant.
In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances that led to the instant crime, including the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.