근로자퇴직급여보장법위반
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
1. The Defendant, as the representative of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C, is an employer who runs the clothing manufacturing business using four workers on a commercial basis.
When an employee retires, an employer shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days from the date on which the cause for such payment occurred.
Provided, That the payment date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.
Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 13,806,314, as well as KRW 6,033,591, and KRW 7,772,723, and KRW 13,806,314, which were retired from the said place of business within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement on the extension of the payment deadline between the parties. < Amended by Act No. 8857, Aug. 15, 2008; Act No. 1250, Dec. 20, 2016>
2. The above facts charged are the crimes falling under Article 44 subparagraph 1 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the explicit intent of the victimized employee under the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act.
In this regard, workers D and E can recognize the fact that they expressed their intent not to be punished for the defendant after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.