Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant, as the representative of corporation B, is an employer who employs 300 full-time workers in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Building D and operates human resources dispatch business.

When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, retirement allowances, and all other money and valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred, unless the parties have agreed on the extension of the fixed date due to any special circumstances.

Nevertheless, the Defendant worked in the said workplace from August 27, 2018 to February 28, 2019 and did not pay KRW 8,442,723,00 in total, as shown in the attached list of crimes, including KRW 1,051,140, to four employees, within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment date, as shown in the attached list of crimes, including KRW 3,591,180, and annual allowances, from December 26, 2017 to March 31, 2019 at the said workplace, and paid KRW 4,393,557, to two employees’ retirement allowances, including KRW 4,393,57, as stated in the attached list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each written statement made by the police with respect to the petitioner (G or H) and a written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the submission of data on year-end retirement allowance calculation and retirement allowance calculation statement;

1. Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act regarding facts constituting an offense; Article 44 Subparag. 1 and Article 9 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act; the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among persons who choose a fine for concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act recognizes the defendant's error in sentencing, and appears to have failed to liquidate money due to business difficulties rather than to do so in bad faith, the fact that the employee F, I's retirement pay was paid as substitute payment, but the substitute payment is equivalent to substitute payment.