Defendant

A A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1.8 million, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant A is the representative of the shopping district management business entity E who employs 18 full-time workers in Seo-gu, Daejeon.

Defendant

A on April 15, 2012, dismissed his employee F, G, H, I, J, and K (hereinafter “F”) or “victims,” and six employees F, etc. filed an application for unfair dismissal with the Chungcheong Regional Labor Relations Commission on May 24, 2012, and the Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for dismissal on July 9, 2012.

On August 6, 2012, six persons including F were dissatisfied with the first instance court's decision, and filed an application for reexamination seeking the revocation of the first instance court's decision with the National Labor Relations Commission. On November 13, 2012, the National Labor Relations Commission revoked the first instance court's decision and issued an order to remedy E on November 29, 2012 to reinstate six persons, including F, etc., by November 29, 2013, to pay the amount equivalent to wages during the dismissal period, and E filed a lawsuit with the Seoul Administrative Court on December 12, 2012 regarding the review decision of the National Labor Relations Commission, but the Seoul Administrative Court dismissed the Seoul Administrative Court's decision on June 11, 2013, and became final and conclusive on July 2, 2013.

On December 24, 2013, the National Labor Relations Commission issued a notice of the scheduled accusation against E, and urged E to implement a remedy order, but Defendant A did not pay the amount of wages during the period of dismissal for the victims as of April 17, 2014, and did not comply with the remedy order due to the failure to pay the amount of wages during the period of dismissal for the victims, as of April 17, 2014.

The ‘L' in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, ‘2015 High 467' claims that commercial buildings and the management body of commercial buildings are the management body of each other and dispute.

Defendants are those on the side of the shopping mall.

The victim M(42 years of age) is a person on the side of the commercial building management body.

On July 28, 2014, the Defendants replaced the number of the entrance door of the mechanical room by the victim at the “L” underground parking lot around 12:08.