beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.20 2016고정1797

근로자퇴직급여보장법위반등

Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is the representative director of C of a stock company in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B 15 who conducts electronic commerce by using six full-time workers.

When a worker retires or dies, an employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money and valuables within 14 days after the cause occurs.

Provided, That the date of payment may be extended by an agreement between the parties in special circumstances.

Nevertheless, the workplace is working in the above workplace.

A total sum of 34,941,749 won was not paid to six workers, including attached list of crimes D, within 14 days from the date of each retirement without any agreement on extension of the due date between the parties.

(b) Where a worker retires or dies, an employer in violation of the Guarantee of Retirement Benefits for Workers Act shall pay the worker a retirement allowance within 14 days after such cause occurs;

Provided, That the date of payment may be extended by an agreement between the parties in special circumstances.

Nevertheless, from August 1, 2014 to July 31, 2015 at the above workplace.

A total of KRW 13,059,151 of retirement allowances has not been paid to five workers, as shown in the separate list of crimes, including D, within 14 days from the date of each retirement without any agreement on extension of the due date between the parties.

2. Each of the above facts charged is a crime falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act. Under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, a public prosecution cannot be instituted against the victim’s express intent. According to the records of this case, each of the workers on the list of crimes listed in the attached list has withdrawn the expression of intent to punish the Defendant