근로기준법위반
The judgment below
The guilty portion shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 6 million won.
The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.
1. The court below dismissed this part of the prosecution on the grounds that the above victims withdraw their wish to punish after instituting a prosecution as to the violation of the Labor Standards Act due to the payment of wages to workers L and H among each of the facts charged in the instant case (number 3,7 of the crime sight table 1 in the original judgment), and convicted all of the remaining facts charged.
However, since the defendant appealed only for the guilty portion on the grounds of unfair sentencing as follows, and the dismissal of the public prosecution is separated and finalized, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the conviction portion of the judgment below
2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (defendants) of the lower court’s punishment of KRW 8 million is too unreasonable.
The Defendant explicitly withdrawn the assertion of misunderstanding of legal principles on the first trial date.
3. The circumstances after the crime are not good and the defendant has the same criminal power, such as the fact that the amount of wages that has yet to be paid to workers still is considerable, the defendant submits a written employment contract, which was written retroactively from the date of the original trial, as reference data for sentencing, etc.
Meanwhile, the Defendant reflects the mistake, additionally agreed with four victimized workers in the trial, and the Defendant appears to have received a substitute payment equivalent to some of the unpaid wages. However, given that the payment of substitute payment was made to the State due to the damage caused by the instant crime, it is difficult to view it as the Defendant’s repayment of the unpaid wages to be the same as the Defendant’s repayment of the unpaid wages to the victimized workers with its own property, unless there is any evidence that the Defendant fully repaid the substitute payment.
For the same reason, even though there was an agreement with the victimized employee I in the trial, some of the amount equivalent to the unpaid wage paid to I is a substitute payment, it is also considered in sentencing.
be supported by the defendant.