A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles agreed that the Defendant shall pay retirement allowances included in the daily allowance at the time of the instant employment contract with E, and that all retirement allowances will not be paid after the termination of the contract. ① The Defendant was consulted by the attorney-at-law with the effect that the said agreement remains effective, and ② Furthermore, the amount of retirement allowances cannot be specified until recently due to disputes in E and civil law, and thus the Defendant should not be held liable for the crime in violation of the Labor Standards Act, despite the absence of criminal intent or the inevitable circumstances, there is an error in the misapprehension of legal principles or by misapprehending legal principles which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The judgment of the court below on the imposition of an unreasonable sentencing (700,000 won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The right to claim the payment of retirement allowances is only a requirement for the termination of the labor relationship, and there is no room for the obligation to pay retirement allowances, so long as the labor contract remains in existence, even if the payment of a certain amount is made on the monthly wage or daily wage received every month, it is not effective as a payment of retirement allowances as stipulated in Article 34 of the Labor Standards Act. In addition, the agreement to receive the payment of retirement allowances by including it on the monthly wage or daily daily wage is null and void as it is in violation of Article 34 of the Labor Standards Act, which is a mandatory law.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Do2211, Jul. 12, 2002; 2000Da27671, Jul. 26, 2002). Therefore, an employer shall pay retirement allowances on the monthly salary of each month or daily allowance, which has no legal effect.