logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.09.26 2017노2119
근로기준법위반등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant, while operating a beauty room with a wife, did not pay KRW 34,709,480, total amount of wages and retirement allowances of KRW 5,81,220,00 from June 20 to April 17, 2015 to G who worked as a beauty artist from December 20, 2012 to May 17, 2015, and did not pay KRW 34,709,480 and retirement allowances of KRW 5,81,220 to April 20 from June 20, 2013. After the closure of the above beauty room, the Defendant again employed G while running a restaurant from May 20, 2015, but did not pay KRW 8,360,00 in total from June 20, 2015 to December 12, 2015. The period for wages and retirement allowances for G is very high, and the total amount of wages and retirement allowances for G is more than 48,000.

Nevertheless, at the lower court, the Defendant denied the crime by not being an actual operator of a beauty room and restaurant, or disputing the monthly wage of G, etc. up to the trial, and the wages and retirement allowances of G were not paid at all up to the trial, and did not agree with G.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized all the crimes of this case at the latest after the trial, and there is no record of criminal punishment or criminal punishment exceeding the fine for the same kind of crime.

On April 18, 2015, the part of the total wages that the Defendant is obliged to pay to G by either paying cash to G or allowing credit card use until the closure of the cosmetic.

The court below, in light of these circumstances, has determined a sentence by comprehensively taking into account all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, including the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. The sentencing of the court below seems to have been conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion, and circumstances alleged by the defendant in the trial of a party are already considered in the court below's determination of punishment, and otherwise, the court below's sentencing shall be changed.

arrow