If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be paid.

The defendant, as the representative director of the limited liability company D in Tong-si, is the employer who ordinarily employs 70 workers and operates the taxi transport business.

1. On January 201, the Defendant violated the Minimum Wage Act: (a) paid the amount of KRW 914,580,000, less than the minimum wage amount of KRW 924,682, which was less than the minimum wage amount of KRW 924,582, to E, who worked as a taxi engineer from the above D; and (b) paid wages of KRW 453,797, which was less than the minimum wage amount of KRW 93,797, including E, from the time to June 201,

2. The Defendant violating the Labor Standards Act is working from the above D on September 19, 193.

Around June 30, 2011, the bonus of KRW 727,320 for the period of medical care from December 25, 2010 to June 30, 2011, which was hospitalized to F as an occupational traffic accident, was not paid within 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement on the extension of the due date between the parties concerned, and the total amount of KRW 71,262,686, including bonuses, unused annual leave allowances, minimum wage, part of retirement allowances, etc., as shown in attached Table (2) did not be paid within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement on the extension of the due date between the parties concerned.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each complaint, an investigation table as to whether the minimum wage for year 201 falls short of the minimum wage, average wages and retirement allowances;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 28 and 6(1) of the Minimum Wage Act (which means the payment of the minimum wage), Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act (which means the payment of the minimum wage), and the choice of fines, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Determination of the Defendant’s assertion under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act on the inducement of the workhouse is unreasonable in light of the characteristics of the taxi industry, and the bonus is given to temporary layoff benefits due to occupational traffic accidents.