근로기준법위반등
All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.
1. The summary of the facts charged is an employer who ordinarily employs 12 workers in the name of D in the name of Jinsung-gun located in (State) G in the Ginsung-gun and operates a vessel processing business.
A. Although an employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act pays wages, compensations, and other money and valuables within 14 days from the time when the cause for such payment occurred if a worker dies or retires, the Defendant did not pay 170,486,120 won, including the wages of 4,200,000 won in June 1, 2016 to October 30, 2016 at the said workplace, as well as the wages of 19 employees, including the wages of 170,486,120 won in total, within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties to the extension of the payment deadline.
B. Although an employer violating the Act on the Guarantee of Retirement Benefits of Workers has paid retirement allowances within 14 days from the time when the reason for the payment thereof occurred if the employee retires, the Defendant did not pay the retirement allowances within 14 days from the date of the retirement without the agreement between the parties to the extension of the payment deadline, as well as the amount of KRW 8,904,049, which served as an official title in the above workplace from September 1, 2014 to October 30, 2016, including the amount of KRW 33,318,739, which is the sum of five retirement allowances of the five retirement allowances of the retired employee, as shown in the attached crime list (2).
2. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the fact that wages are unpaid is an offense falling under Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and the fact that retirement allowances are unpaid is an offense falling under Article 44 subparag. 1 and Article 9 of the Workers’ Retirement Benefits Guarantee Act.
According to Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso of Article 44 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits, each of the above crimes cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent or against the victim’s explicit intent.
However, after the prosecution of this case, a letter of withdrawal was submitted to the effect that workers do not want punishment against the defendant.
Therefore, Article 327 of the Criminal Procedure Act is amended.