beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 홍성지원 2018.11.19 2017고정266

근로기준법위반

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the owner of B, who is located in the Yacheon-si and has the place of shipment on the Yacheon-do, and runs a fishery business using four full-time workers.

The Defendant did not pay the total amount of KRW 2,960,00 from the date of his retirement within 14 days without agreement on the extension of the payment date, including the amount of KRW 1.2 million for July 2, 2014, KRW 1.2 million for August 2014, KRW 1.2 million for the retirement of Indonesia, who retired from the said workplace as a seafarer from April 22, 2014 to September 4, 2014, KRW 5.6 million for September.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Witness D's testimony;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Labor contract;

1. A certificate of employment change, etc. of foreign workers;

1. Business registration certificate (the defendant and his defense counsel agreed that the defendant and C have extended the payment date of wages since July 2014 to nine months (the expiration date of gold period) and that C had not been able to pay wages on September 5, 2014, the defendant and his defense counsel denied the crime by asserting that C had not been able to pay wages.

However, insofar as there is no evidence supporting the above agreement, it cannot be denied criminal facts on the premise that the above assertion was accepted, and the absence of such agreement is sufficiently recognized by the above evidence. On the other hand, the absence of such agreement is sufficiently recognized by the above evidence.

However, it shall be taken into account sentencing that C had practical difficulties in paying the wages of the Defendant after September 2014, on the grounds that C left the place of business without permission on September 5, 2014 and did not participate in the criminal conciliation at the time of the investigation of the instant case, and that the Defendant would have suffered considerable damage due to the aforementioned unauthorized secession from office)

Application of Statutes

1. Article 109 of the relevant Act concerning criminal facts, Articles 109 (1) and 36 of the Standards for Optional Labor, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;