근로기준법위반등
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. The appellant against the Defendant’s appeal shall submit a written reason for appeal to the appellate court within 20 days from the date of receipt of the records of trial (Article 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). If the reason for appeal is not submitted within the said period, the appellate court shall dismiss the appeal by decision (Article 361-4(1) of the same Act). According to the records, the Defendant filed an appeal against the lower judgment on February 24, 2017, while the Defendant was served with a notice of receipt of records of trial by this court on May 18, 2017, the Defendant did not submit a written reason for appeal within 20 days from the date he/she received the notice of receipt of records of trial by the Defendant living together with this court, and the petition of appeal does not include the reason for appeal, nor does he/she find any reason for ex officio examination otherwise
Therefore, the defendant's appeal should be dismissed in accordance with Article 361-4 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
2. Judgment on the prosecutor's appeal
A. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (amounting to KRW 5,00,000) is too unhued and unreasonable.
B. Determination 1) In light of the fact that the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has a unique area for sentencing determination, and that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and that the sentencing of the first instance does not go beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). 2) The Defendant did not pay wages and retirement allowances of 9 workers who are up to KRW 70,00,000,000, and accordingly, the said employee had a considerable economic difficulty, so it is recognized that the nature of each of the crimes of this case is not less than that of the crimes of this case, and that the Defendant was sentenced three times to a fine for the same offense.
However, the above circumstances are already in the hearing process of the lower court.