근로기준법위반
All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.
The Defendant, in the facts charged, has its head office in Jinju-si, obtains a construction business license under the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, and is the actual manager of C Co., Ltd. operating a specialized construction business, and subcontracts the construction of reinforced concrete in the grain disaster risk district to E in the Namnam-do Dilwon, the prime contractor, for which he subcontracted the construction of the Daang Construction Co., Ltd. to E.
The defendant from June 1, 2011 to the same year, as E, at the construction site above.
7.5. Until May 1, 200, F’s wage of KRW 2,600,000 as well as KRW 11,115,00,00 for six retired workers employed by E, as described in the Schedule of Crimes, did not pay each of them within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties to the extension of the due date.
Judgment
Each of the facts charged in the instant case is a crime falling under Articles 109(1) and 44-2 of the Labor Standards Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act. According to the written agreement submitted on April 5, 2013, the victims may recognize the fact that the victims have withdrawn their wish to punish the defendant. Thus, all of the facts charged in the instant case are dismissed under Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.