beta
Text
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged [2015 Height 1120] The Defendant is a representative of C in both weeks, who employs 60 full-time workers and operates textile manufacturing business. A.
The Defendant in violation of the Labor Standards Act, while working in the foregoing workplace from June 16, 2014 to September 11, 2014, did not pay the total amount of KRW 4,100,000,000, which was retired from office, to 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment due date.
B. The Defendant in violation of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act did not pay KRW 14,823,468 of the retirement allowance retired from his/her business place from February 13, 2008 to December 31, 2014, to 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment date.
[2015 Man-Ma3426] The Defendant is a representative of “C” in both weeks, who ordinarily employs 60 workers and operates textile manufacturing business.
When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money and valuables within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred.
Nevertheless, the Defendant served from July 3, 2012 to March 31, 2015 in the said workplace and retired from the said workplace, and the Defendant did not pay KRW 9,938,697 in the aggregate of KRW 167,740 on January 3, 2015, as well as KRW 7,204,697, and KRW 7,204,697, and KRW 1,650,000 on August 16, 2014, and KRW 1,084,00 on January 1, 2015 to January 20, 2015, within 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment period.
2. The facts charged above are crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act. The records show that the worker D and the worker.