When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is an employer who employs approximately 15 full-time workers as a real manager of D Co., Ltd. in Ansan-si, Masan-si, and engages in human resources supply business.

The Defendant worked for the dispatched worker in F from March 24, 2015 to March 10, 2017, while serving for the period from March 24, 2015 to March 10, 2017, and did not pay 776,40 won for unused annual leave allowances, retirement allowances 3,364,579 won, retirement allowances 723,600 won for unpaid annual leave allowances of H from June 18, 2015 to September 30, 2016, and did not pay retirement allowances 723,60 won for unpaid annual leave allowances of H from July 10, 2015 to December 31, 2016, without agreement between the parties concerned on the extension of the period.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each authentic statement made to G, H and I;

1. Some copies of the wage details table;

1. Details of each benefit account;

1. Business registration certificate and documents related to the corporation;

1. J-related documents;

1. Labor contract, forms of labor contract, and forms of private employees;

1. The detailed statement of each salary (1. The defendant and his defense counsel paid each month to all workers each month under the name of the non-annual leave allowance;

However, it is difficult to see that the full-time allowance is an annual allowance, which is the same monthly amount, and it is difficult to see that it is an annual allowance, and that there is a separate item of the full-time allowance and annual allowance in the detailed statement of salary, and that there is no agreement with the workers who are to pay the annual allowance on the premise that the annual allowance is to be used only for a certain number of days, the full-time allowance paid by the Defendant cannot be deemed an annual allowance.

2. The defendant and his defense counsel do not meet the requirements for retirement benefits payment since workers have worked in D Co., Ltd. for a period of one year.

However, in full view of the evidence in the ruling, workers were transferred to D.