logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2021.03.31 2021고정110
근로자퇴직급여보장법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is an employer who is the representative director D of the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Group C of building B and engages in advertising agency business with seven full-time workers.

(a) An employer who violates Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act shall, if a worker dies or retires, pay the worker wages, compensations, or any other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;

Provided, That the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

Nevertheless, from May 1, 2017 to May 31, 2020, employees E, who were employed in office and retired from office from May 31, 2020, did not pay 20,278,457 won in total as well as 20,278,457 won in the attached list of crimes, as shown in the attached list of crimes, within 14 days from each retirement date without agreement between the parties to the extension of payment date.

(b) An employer who violates Article 9 of the Guarantee of Retirement Benefits for a worker shall, where the worker dies or retires, pay the worker a retirement allowance within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;

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

Nevertheless, the defendant employed in the above workplace from May 1, 2017 to May 31, 2020, and did not pay 32,412,007 won in total for six employees as well as 8,306,507 won in the list of crimes in the attached Form, as well as 32,412,07 won in total for six employees, within 14 days from each retirement date on which the grounds for payment occurred, without any agreement on the extension of the payment period between the parties.

2. The facts charged of the instant case are crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and Articles 44(1) and 9 of the Workers’ Retirement Benefit Security Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the explicit intent of the victimized employee under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, and Article 44 Subparag. 1 of the proviso of the Workers’ Retirement Benefit Security Act.

arrow