Of the facts charged in this case, violation of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act.

The defendant is the representative of C in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, who is an employer who employs three full-time workers and operates a rental business during construction.

When an employer intends to dismiss a worker, he/she shall make a prior announcement at least 30 days, and if he/she fails to make a prior announcement at least 30 days, he/she shall pay the ordinary wages for at least 30 days.

Nevertheless, on October 9, 2012, the Defendant dismissed D workers who were victims without giving an advance notice by 30 days prior to the date of dismissal at the above workplace and did not pay 3,000,000 won or more of ordinary wages for 30 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

1. Relevant Article 110 of the Labor Standards Act and Articles 110 subparagraph 1 and 26 of the Labor Standards Act concerning criminal facts;

2. Fine of 500,000 won to be suspended; and

3. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act (50,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act for the inducement of a workhouse.

4. The portion of rejection of prosecution under Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that the defendant has no previous conviction in the same kind, the confession and reflect of the crime, and the fact that he agreed with the victim);

1. The Defendant, in the facts charged, did not pay KRW 2,729,749 of the retirement allowances of workers D, who were retired from the said workplace from May 14, 2008 to October 9, 2012, within 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

2. The judgment was based on the following facts: (a) the crime falling under Article 44 Subparag. 1 and Article 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the proviso to Article 44 of the same Act; and (b) according to the victim D’s statement on April 10, 2013 of the victim D’s preparation, the victim may be found to have withdrawn his/her wishing to punish the Defendant on June 10, 2013, which is the date of the instant indictment.

3. According to the conclusion, this part of the prosecution is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.