Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. The judgment of the court below and the appellate court made efforts to recover damage, such as the Defendant’s confession and reply to the instant crime, the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the continuous repayment of the unpaid wages to workers, etc. In light of the favorable circumstances, the amount of the unpaid wages is not significant, and the fact that some workers have been punished for the same kind of crime is disadvantageously considering the fact that the Defendant’s age, character, environment, circumstances leading to the instant crime, means, and consequence, the court below’s punishment is too unreasonable in light of the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character, and environment, the circumstances after the instant crime, etc.

3. Since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is ruled again after pleading.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment] Criminal facts and the summary of the evidence admitted by the appellate court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the former Labor Standards Act (amended by Act No. 15108, Nov. 28, 2017); the selection of fines for criminal facts;

1. Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act concerning confinement in a workhouse;

1. The decision on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is based on the same reasons as indicated in the decision on the allegation of unfair sentencing on the grounds of sentencing.