The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. The Defendant in violation of the Labor Standards Act is the representative of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City B, who is an employer who runs a manufacturing business with eight regular workers employed.

The Defendant did not pay 22,052,192 won in total of 5 employees’ wages as shown in the attached list of crimes, including the fact that the Defendant did not pay 313,963 won as wages of February 2, 2012 of the workers D, who worked in the company from October 13, 2008 to April 20, 201, without agreement on the extension of the payment date between the parties concerned, within 14 days from the date on which the cause for payment occurred.

B. The Defendant in violation of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act did not pay KRW 9,331,018 of D retirement pay, as described in the preceding paragraph, within 14 days from the date of occurrence of the cause for payment, without any agreement between the parties to the extension of the due date, and did not pay KRW 34,089,100 in total as stated in the attached list of crimes.

2. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the fact that wages are unpaid after retirement is a crime falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and constitutes a crime of non-compliance under Article 109(2) of the same Act.

In addition, the unpaid retirement allowance is a crime falling under Articles 31 and 9 of the former Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act (amended by Act No. 10967, Jul. 26, 2012). Although the above Act does not provide for the crime as a crime of non-prosecution, the above crime was revised under the proviso of Article 44 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits amended by Act No. 10967, Jul. 26, 2012 as an offense of non-prosecution. The Addenda does not include any transitional provision related to its application, but is more favorable to the defendant, so the amended Act shall be applied pursuant to Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4462, Oct. 28, 2005). The above crime also constitutes a crime of non-prosecution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision

According to the records, the victims want to punish all the defendants after the institution of the prosecution of this case.