logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.09.04 2014고단2512
근로기준법위반등
Text

All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the joint representative of the said company, who employs 10 full-time workers in the name of “(D)D” in Gwangju Mine-gu, and engages in technical service business.

1. Where a worker dies or retires, he/she shall pay the wages, compensations, and all other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;

Defendants jointly did not pay the wages of KRW 7,422,67 from August 1, 2006 through December 20, 2013 to December 20, 2013 to workers E who worked in the said workplace within 14 days from the date of retirement without extending the due date by an agreement between the parties.

The Defendants jointly did not pay 18,407,669 won in total for 5 workers within 14 days from the date of retirement without extending the due date by an agreement between the parties, such as in the list of crimes in the attached Form.

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

Defendants jointly did not pay 18,088,120 retirement allowances of E employed from July 1, 2006 to December 20, 2013 at the same workplace within 14 days from the date of retirement without extending the due date under an agreement between the parties.

The Defendants jointly did not pay the total amount of KRW 5,580,710 to five employees within 14 days from the date of retirement without extending the due date under an agreement between the parties, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Form.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are those falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent under the latter part of Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act.

According to the records of this case, this case is examined.

arrow