The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant, as the representative of C in Jinju City, is an employer who runs the automobile parts manufacturing business using three full-time workers. A.

From January 11, 2010 to August 10, 2013, the Defendant did not pay KRW 2,909,677, in total, KRW 2,909,677 of D (D, Vietnam)’s wages in July 2013, and KRW 709,677 of August of the same year within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties to the extension of the payment date.

B. The Defendant did not pay the said D retirement pay of KRW 2,119,740 within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement between the parties to the extension of the due date.

2. We examine the judgment. The case is a crime falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, and Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express intent. According to the statement on the withdrawal of the petition filed in the trial records, D can be recognized as the fact that it has withdrawn the Defendant's wish to punish the Defendant on April 4, 2014, which is the date the instant prosecution was instituted. Accordingly, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.