logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2016.04.08 2015고정585
근로기준법위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Each "suspect" shall be as stated in the crime in the attached Form except where each "suspects" is dismissed as "defendants".

Since all charges are recognized, Article 4 of the established rules on the appropriateness of the method of preparing written judgments (re-type 2014-1) shall apply.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement made with respect to C and D;

1. Each written petition;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of an organization agreement;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 109(1), 43(1) (which does not pay the full amount of wages) of the Labor Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, Articles 92 subparag. 2(c), 31(1) (which violates the provisions of the organization agreement concerning the grounds for disciplinary action and dismissal and the important procedures among the details of the organization agreement) of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, Articles 92 subparag. 2(e) and 31(1) (which violates matters concerning the attendance at meetings among the contents of the organization agreement) of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, and Articles 92 subparag. 2(e) and 31(1) of the Labor Relations Adjustment Act (which violates the provisions of the organization agreement concerning the provision of facilities, convenience and attendance during

2. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which increases concurrent crimes;

3. Article 70 (1) and Article 69 (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse.

4. Determination on the key issue of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which is the order of provisional payment

1. The criminal facts stated in the summary of the Defendant’s and defense counsel’s assertion are based on the premise that the Defendant’s general labor union prior to the North Korean headquarters of the North Korean Headquarters (hereinafter “former North Korean Trade Union”) and the agreement concluded on October 26, 2006 (hereinafter “former Organization Convention”) are valid.

However, following the conclusion of the former organization agreement, the Defendant’s chapter E of the Korea Labor Union E branch (hereinafter “Korea Labor Union E branch”) in North Korea, a number of labor unions established around September 2013, 2013, is new between the Korean Labor Union and the Korean Labor Union, a representative bargaining trade union, following the process of establishing a legitimate representative bargaining trade union according to ombudsman’s request for collective bargaining.

arrow