logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 서부지원 2017.10.12 2017고합50
상습준사기등
Text

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Defendant

B For 40 hours of sexual assault treatment program.

Reasons

Criminal facts

1. The Defendants jointly committed the crimes of the Defendants: (a) run the I farm, a farm that raises livestock, such as pigs, from around winter-gun to around May 1, 2016 (F to G directors, new addresses H), from around 1981 to around 15, 201; (b) the victims J (W, currently 53 years old) were those with intellectual disability 2; and (c) the Defendants, upon request of the victims’ husband K and the victims’ mother L on March 1, 1994, tried the victims to leave the farm of this case at the request of the victims’ husband K and the victims from around May 15, 2016 to around 15, 2016.

A. Habitual quasi-Fraud Defendants were able to obtain pecuniary benefits equivalent to wages by using the circumstances such as resisting the victim even if the victim did not make a monthly wage due to intellectual disorder or finding a new person in the government office after leaving the victim in order to take measures, thereby making it difficult for the victim to do work without paying the victim wages.

around March 1, 1994, the Defendants had the victim work on a farm and dry field with at least eight hours a day, and had the victim obtain economic benefits equivalent to the same amount by failing to pay 263,655 won corresponding to the wages in March 1994 to the victim. From around May 15, 2016, the Defendants obtained economic benefits equivalent to the same amount by allowing the victim to work on the farm of this case without paying wages from about 22 years to May 15, 2016, by allowing the victim to work on the farm of this case.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to obtain financial benefits through a mental disorder of the victim habitually.

B. The Defendants in violation of the Minimum Wage Act, as the users of the farm of this case, must pay wages above the minimum wage amount to workers subject to the application of the minimum wage.

Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired with each other.

arrow