However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

(e).

The defendant is a person who is a representative director of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G Building 535 and is a user who is performing a new construction work of Jcondo in Gangwon-gun I.

The Defendant was employed by the Defendant at the above construction site on July 20, 201 and worked on duty on August 11, 201, and did not pay the amount of KRW 2,397,020, totaling KRW 1,146,400 in July 201, and KRW 2,397,020 in August 201, as well as KRW 1,250 in July 1, 201.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the police statement of K and L;

1. Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act, the choice of imprisonment with labor concerning criminal facts;

1. Part concerning the rejection of prosecution under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime and reflects it, and that there is no criminal conviction or heavier than

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. The Defendant violated the respective Labor Standards Act with respect to certain workers under [Attachment 2012] and [Attachment 200,000] of the wage of the retired worker C employed on or around February 15, 2012, and worked on or around July 15, 2011, while being employed on or around February 15, 201, as well as on or around February 15, 2012, the Defendant did not pay the total wage of KRW 16,536,60 for the above period as the total wage of the retired worker D and the total wage of KRW 27,750,00 for the above period as of February 15, 2012 without agreement on extension of the due date.

B. From July 1, 2011, the Defendant was in violation of the Labor Standards Act No. 221, the Defendant worked as the head of the above site at the construction site and did not pay the victim F, who retired on February 16, 2012, a total of KRW 30,375,000, including the wage during the above period, to the victim F, who was retired on February 16, 201.

2. We examine the judgment, and each of the above facts charged is an offense falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and is in accordance with Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act.