The judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of the facts charged of this case in the absence of justifiable grounds to believe that such act does not constitute a crime because the defendant believed advice of certified labor affairs consultant and deducted wages from the wages of the workers of this case in accordance with ordinary practices is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or in the misunderstanding of legal principles which affected the conclusion

The sentence of the lower court’s unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Article 16 of the Criminal Act claiming a misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles provides that an act of misunderstanding that one's act does not constitute a crime under the Acts and subordinate statutes shall not be punishable only when there is a justifiable reason for misunderstanding. It generally purports that an act of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles shall not be punishable in cases where a crime is committed but it is recognized that it does not constitute a crime under the Acts and subordinate statutes

Therefore, whether there exists such a justifiable reason shall be determined depending on whether an actor was unable to recognize the illegality of his act as a result of failure to perform his/her duty even though there was a possibility that he/she could have known the illegality of his/her act if he/she did not make a serious effort to avoid it because he/she was able to examine or inquire about the possibility of illegality of his/her act, and the degree of efforts necessary for recognizing the illegality should be determined differently according to the detailed situation of the act, the awareness ability of the actor, and the social group to which the actor belongs.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do3717, Mar. 24, 2006; 2005Do6316, Mar. 10, 2006). Meanwhile, the right to claim the payment has already occurred.