logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2019.05.16 2018고정985
근로자퇴직급여보장법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a representative C in Bupyeong-si B, who is an employer who runs a marina business with one full-time worker.

When a worker retires, the employer shall pay the retirement allowance within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred.

Provided, That the payment date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties if special circumstances exist.

Nevertheless, the Defendant had worked from January 5, 1995 to September 22, 2017 and had not paid KRW 20,004,764 of D retirement pay within 14 days from the date on which the cause for the payment occurred, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

Defendant

In addition, the defense counsel asserts that since the employee D's occupational embezzlement has been committed in the company operated by the defendant and the amount of damage is equivalent to KRW 100 million, since the defendant did not pay four insurance premiums and factory rent due to the damage, the defendant is unable to expect lawful acts of the user or is recognized as an inevitable circumstance, it falls under the grounds for dismissal of liability, or the above damage claim and retirement allowance payment obligation should be offset or deducted.

① However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it cannot be deemed that the defendant could not prevent the delayed payment of retirement allowances even if he/she had made every gender and efforts, and therefore, it does not seem that there is a ground to dismiss the defendant's liability.

② In addition, according to the main sentence of Article 43(1) of the Labor Standards Act, since wages are paid in full to workers in currency, it is in principle that the employer does not set off against the worker’s wage claims with the employer’s claims against the worker. This is to protect the worker in an economic and social subordinate relationship, and it also has the nature of retirement allowances that the worker is paid.

arrow