beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 마산지원 2020.05.19 2020고단348

근로기준법위반등

Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is an employer who is a representative of the C Company in Haan-gun, Haan-gun, who ordinarily employs four workers and operates the automobile parts manufacturing business.

When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred.

Provided, That in special circumstances, the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties.

Nevertheless, the defendant is working in the production division from July 8, 2019 to January 31, 2020 at the above workplace.

The retirement D’s total wage of KRW 6,440,00, including KRW 3,220,000 in December 2019, and KRW 6,440,000 in January 200, as shown in the attached crime list, did not pay KRW 19,00,000 in total for three retired workers within 14 days from each retirement date, which is the date on which the cause for payment occurred, without any agreement on the extension of payment between the parties.

(b) When a worker retires, the employer shall pay the retirement allowance within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred; and

Provided, That the date of payment may be extended according to an agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

Nevertheless, the Defendant is working in production service from March 1, 2013 to January 31, 2020 at the above workplace.

The retirement allowance of retired E, including 16,622,465 won, did not pay 19,702,619 won in total for two retirement allowances of retired workers within 14 days from the date of each retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the cause for payment, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are those falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, and Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, which are different from or against the victim’s explicit intent