근로자퇴직급여보장법위반
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant is an employer who employs one full-time worker in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul and operates a restaurant in the name of “C”. The Defendant did not pay KRW 6,361,240 of D retirement pay from March 7, 2012 to May 10, 2016 at the said workplace without an agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment deadline.
However, this is a crime falling under the main sentence of Article 44 and Article 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent pursuant to the proviso of Article 44 of the same Act.
In such a case, according to each of the "written withdrawal of truth" and "written withdrawal of punishment," prepared by D bound in the trial records, the victim may recognize the fact that he/she has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on January 16, 2017, which is after the prosecution of this case.
Therefore, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.