beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 마산지원 2015.10.30 2015고단838

근로기준법위반등

Text

All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is an employer who ordinarily employs 20 workers under the trade name “C” in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, who is a business owner engaged in siren parts manufacturing business.

When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money and valuables within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred.

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant entered on November 4, 2009, and paid 326,700 won as wages of July 21, 2015 of the retired FF on July 21, 2015, within 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement on the extension of the due date between the parties concerned.

(b) When a worker retires, the employer shall pay the retirement allowance within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred; and

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant, who was employed on November 4, 2009 and retired on July 21, 2015, did not pay the total of KRW 24,125,140 as well as KRW 14,09,410 of the FF’s retirement allowances retired on July 21, 2015, as indicated in the detailed statement of personal overdue money and valuables in arrears, within 14 days from the date of retirement, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

2. The above facts charged are the crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, or Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act or the proviso to Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act.

According to the records, the victims have withdrawn their wish to punish the defendant on October 20, 2015, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted.