In regard to this, the part of the judgment of the court below against which only the defendant appealed, and the prosecutor fails to appeal, which dismissed the public prosecution, becomes final and conclusive separately. Therefore, the scope of the judgment of this court

2. The decision of the court below (6 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable as to the summary of the grounds for appeal.

3. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct determination, where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Defendant is against all of the instant crimes recognized by the Defendant.

Since the defendant was in the first instance, S does not want to be punished against the defendant by agreement with the worker S.

The total amount of unpaid wages to S was KRW 1,521,120.

Such circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

However, the Labor Standards Act and the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act impose strict criminal liability on the unpaid wages or retirement allowances in order to prevent the situation in which a worker's failure to pay a due labor, thereby threatening the guarantee of basic life and stable livelihood in the old age.

The Defendant delayed payment of wages, etc. for eight workers, and the total amount of overdue wages, etc. reaches about KRW 35 million.

Some workers have not received wages, etc. from the defendant until now, and have a lot of economic suffering.