If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

The defendant is the representative director of C, a corporation with Busan B and 702, who is an employer who employs not less than five full-time workers and operates a building cleaning service business.

An employer or worker who is dissatisfied with an order for remedy or a decision of dismissal issued by a local Labor Relations Commission may file an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission within ten days from the date when he/she receives a written decision of dismissal, and the employer or worker may file an action in accordance with the Administrative Litigation Act with respect to the decision of reexamination issued by the National Labor Relations Commission within 15 days from the date when the written decision of reexamination is served, and the decision of the Supreme Court becomes final and conclusive if no application

1. Since the Defendant was unfairly unfair on July 1, 2013 for workers D, the Defendant filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission after receiving on September 23, 2013 the written authorization of the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission to reinstate the original position to the original position and pay an amount equivalent to wages, but was dismissed. While the administrative litigation was initiated, even though the order for remedy was not paid to D even though the first instance court’s order for remedy was finalized (on July 15, 2014) in the lawsuit, the Defendant failed to comply with the order for remedy.

2. The Defendant applied for reexamination to the National Labor Relations Commission after receiving a written decision of the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission on February 7, 2014, which requires workers D to restore to the original position and pay an amount equivalent to wages, on October 6, 2013. Although the National Labor Relations Commission rendered the said decision at the first instance trial union, even though the remedy order became final and conclusive due to the failure to institute administrative litigation (on June 6, 2014), the Defendant failed to comply with the order for remedy.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written accusation;

1. A report on the non-performance;

1. Application of the statute of the award;

1. Relevant Articles of the Act and the choice of punishment concerning the facts constituting the crime;