The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant is an actual manager of C in the fourth-fiveth floor of the Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building B, who ordinarily employs 10 workers and engages in the futures service business.

An employer shall pay wages, compensations, retirement allowances, and all other money and valuables within 14 days from the date on which the cause for such payment occurred.

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

A. The Defendant, in violation of the Labor Standards Act, worked in the above workplace from November 24, 2010 to February 8, 2015, and did not pay KRW 9,414,280 in total amount of wages of two workers, including KRW 1,100,00 on August 8, 2014 of retired workers D, as indicated in the attached crime list, within 14 days from the date of occurrence of each payment cause, without any agreement between the parties on extension of payment date.

B. The Defendant had worked in the above workplace from November 24, 2010 to February 8, 2015, and did not pay KRW 9,001,440,000, in total, for two employees, as indicated in the list of crimes in attached Table, including KRW 4,563,090, etc. of retirement allowances of retired workers D, within 14 days from the date of each retirement without any agreement on the extension of payment period between the parties concerned.

2. The grounds for dismissing the public prosecution are the facts charged in the instant case that falls under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Workers’ Retirement Benefit Security Act, and that the public prosecution may not be instituted against the intent expressed by the victim under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, the proviso to Article 44 of the Workers’ Retirement Benefit Security Act.

The record reveals that D/ E does not want punishment for the defendant after the prosecution of this case, the fact that each written withdrawal of a petition is submitted to this court can be recognized.

Therefore, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.