beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2016.04.08 2015고단983

근로기준법위반등

Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is an employer who runs a construction business by employing 13 full-time workers as the representative of corporation D in Leecheon-si, Inc.

1. When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and all other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay the total amount of KRW 1,880,50 in October 2, 2012, the wage of KRW 1,880,50 in 2013, the wage of KRW 1,880,550 in January 2, 2013, the wage of KRW 1,880,550 in March 2013, the wage of KRW 1,880,50,50 in May 2013, the wage of KRW 1,880,50,550 in June 1, 2013, the wage of KRW 1,880,550 in August 2013, the wage of KRW 1,880,50 in August 31, 2013, the wage of KRW 80,50 in November 1, 2013, and the wage of KRW 1,850 in December 1, 2013, 4058

2. An employer shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred, if a worker retires;

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 26,927,512 of the retirement allowances of retired workers E while working in the above workplace from September 2, 1998 to December 31, 2013, within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement on the extension of payment deadline between the parties.

2. We examine the judgment. The case is a crime falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, and the proviso of Article 44 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits. According to the “written agreement and written non-written application for punishment” compiled in the records, the victim can be acknowledged to have withdrawn his/her wish to punish the Defendant on April 6, 2016, which is after the prosecution of the case is instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is instituted in accordance with Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.