logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.09.29 2016고합484
근로기준법위반
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years, for one year and six months, and for one year and one year and one year, respectively.

(b).

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Status of Defendants] Defendant A was employed by the former H Co., Ltd. (former I Co., Ltd.; hereinafter referred to as “I”) in around 1985 and was employed as an employee in charge of management of the 2 welfare center in I Bupyeong Factory. From October 2006 to December 2009, Defendant A was the head of the NA branch of the Korean Democratic Trade Union MM No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as “Gumno Total I branch”).

J is the pro-friendly type of punishment.

Defendant

B is currently employed by around 1983 as a staff member of the I Incheon KD Center, and is working as a staff member from around 1995 to around 1996.

Defendant

C is currently employed as an employee of the I Logistics Center in around 1990, and is working as a union member from October 2013 to September 2015.

[Criminal facts]

1. Defendant A and the Defendant, from among the workers with work experience of at least one year in the primary cooperation (contract), are employed on an average of the production workers (regular workers) through document screening, personal examination, interview, and physical examination. During that process, competition among the production applicants is strong, and the Defendant’s pro-winJ from September 2006 to December 2009 may exercise a large influence on the executives and employees of the 20th executive branch of the 1st executive branch of the 20th executive branch of the 1st executive branch of the 20th executive branch of the 20th executive branch of the 1st executive branch of the 20th executive branch of the 20th executive branch, by approaching the applicants for the employment and requesting the aboveJ to recommend the applicants for the employment as the workers.

At the same time, money was received under the pretext of employment compensation.

A. On September 8, 2015, the Defendant: (a) received KRW 40 million from the Defendant, in response to a solicitation that he/she would be employed as an employee of E&T, a primary contractor of E&T, as an I’s primary contractor, from L, in the vicinity of the International Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu, Incheon; and (b) received KRW 40 million from the said J.

arrow