2. The judgment is based on the following facts: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the facts of the instant crime, and the mistake is divided; (b) there is no circumstance to regard the intentional concealment of property; and (c) there are some reasons to consider the circumstances leading to the instant crime, such as the failure of the contracting company, and the absence of the same criminal record, etc., which are favorable to the Defendant

However, the crime of this case where the defendant delayed payment of approximately 31.3 million won in total to eight workers, based on its content and result, legal interest and protection of law, etc., the crime of this case is not less than that of the defendant, and the defendant did not reach an agreement with workers or pay wages in arrears until three years have passed since the crime of this case, and the defendant's age, character, conduct, intelligence and environment, circumstance and circumstance of delayed payment of wages, delayed payment of wages and other circumstances which are conditions for the sentencing of this case, including the defendant's age, character and behavior, intelligence and environment, delayed payment of wages, period of delay in payment of wages, number of victims, work period, workplace size and work period, circumstances after the crime, criminal records, family relations, health conditions, etc., the defendant's argument is not reasonable and too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's argument is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.