logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 군산지원 2017.03.15 2016고단1049
근로자퇴직급여보장법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the employer who runs the manufacturing and repair business of automobiles by using 58 full-time workers as the D representative in the following City City C (State) and 58 full-time workers.

(a) When a worker dies or retires, an employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act shall pay him/her wages, compensations, or other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;

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

Nevertheless, the defendant had worked in the above workplace from January 2, 2005 to December 15, 2015 and had not paid the total of KRW 3,895,640 of the wages of retired workers E within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement on the extension of payment deadline between the parties.

(b) An employer who violates the guarantee of retirement benefits of an employee shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days after the ground for such payment occurred, in cases where the employee retires;

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 13,858,353 of retirement allowances E of retired workers who worked in the above workplace as described in paragraph 1 and worked in November 1, 2015 from July 6, 2010 to November 1, 2015 and paid KRW 41,025,463 of retirement allowances of retired workers within 14 days from each retirement date without agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment date.

2. Each of the above facts charged is an offense falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, the main text of Article 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits, which cannot be prosecuted against each victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, and the proviso to Article 44 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits. According to each of the agreements withdrawn on March 14, 2017 by the Defendant’s defense counsel, E and F, the victims of the instant prosecution, following the institution of the instant prosecution.

arrow