The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the actual representative of E Co., Ltd. in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, and on December 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract with F, a personal construction business operator, and Kimhae-si G with the amount of KRW 27 million. The Defendant entered into a subcontract with H, a personal construction business operator, and the part of interior interior decoration among the aforesaid interior decoration construction works.

Where a construction business has been executed two or more times under subparagraph 11 of Article 2 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry and a sewage constructor who is not a constructor defined in subparagraph 7 of Article 2 of the same Act fails to pay wages to his/her workers, the immediately upper-tier supplier shall be jointly and severally with a sewage supplier to pay the wages to his/her workers employed by the sewage supplier.

In such cases, where a direct upper-tier contractor is not a constructor referred to in subparagraph 7 of Article 2 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, a constructor referred to in the same subparagraph as the lowest contractor among his/her upper-tier contractors shall be deemed an immediate upper-tier contractor.

The Defendant fails to pay the subcontract price without justifiable grounds. From May 26, 2015 to August 5, 2015, the Defendant worked for the aforementioned construction site and did not pay the total amount of KRW 1,080,000 for workers I retired, as wages of May 1, 2015, wages of KRW 3,060,000 for June 6, 2015, wages of KRW 720,000 for July 20, 2015, total of KRW 5,580,00 for wages of KRW 720,000 for August 20, 2015, and from May 21, 2015 to June 15, 2015, and did not pay the total amount of KRW 1,000,000 for workers J within 00,000 for the aforementioned construction site without justifiable grounds, and did not pay it within 08,010,010 for workers J.

2. The judgment is a crime falling under Articles 109(1) and 44-2 of the Labor Standards Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent of the person working in accordance with Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act. The records are as follows.