근로기준법위반등
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, as the Ctel representative director in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, is an employer who ordinarily employs one worker and operates a service business. From April 26, 2010 to September 17, 2014, the Defendant did not pay KRW 1,388,870 of the wages and retirement allowances and KRW 5,712,960 of the retired worker D wages within 14 days from the date of his/her retirement.
2. Determination
A. Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act; the main text of Article 44(1) and Article 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits;
(b) Crimes of non-violation of an intention: Article 109 (2) of the Labor Standards Act, the proviso to Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act;
C. On May 27, 2016, the victim expressed his intention not to punish the Defendant after the indictment of the instant case.
Judgment dismissing Public Prosecution: Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act