The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

except that from the date of this judgment.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the amount of wages and retirement allowances in arrears and the number of damaged workers, etc., the fact that the judgment of the accused is not less and less severe than the nature of the crime, and the fact that the wage recovered up to the depth requires a long period of time to recover and that the worker’s suffering seems to be severe, etc. is disadvantageous to the accused.

However, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected his mistake.

The defendant agreed with 7 workers in the court below, and the remaining 14 workers after the pronouncement of the court below did not want the punishment of the defendant.

According to Article 232(3) and Article 232(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, in a case where a crime cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent, the withdrawal of the wish to punish or the expression of intent not to punish may be made until the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered. Thus, even if an employee expresses his/her intention not to punish after the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered, the validity under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act may not arise (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do7948, Jul. 27, 2015). As such, the Defendant’s considerable effort to recover damage or even wages and retirement allowances for which the Defendant has not actually paid, etc. are deemed to have been recovered as a substitute payment.

In full view of such circumstances and other circumstances as the defendant's age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is based on its reasoning, and it is again subsequent to the pleading.