logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 마산지원 2014.09.02 2014고정261
근로기준법위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a manager of corporation D in Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, and is an employer in charge of business management.

1. When an employer violating the Labor Standards Act intends to dismiss a worker, he shall give the worker an advance notice at least thirty days prior to the dismissal, and if the employer fails to give such advance notice thirty days prior to the dismissal, he shall pay the ordinary wages for thirty days or more;

Nevertheless, the Defendant immediately dismissed 3,718,850 won equivalent to the ordinary wage for 30 days to E who worked from April 25, 2011 at the above workplace without prior notice as of August 21, 2013 and did not pay 3,718,850 won on the date of dismissal.

2. An employer who violates the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act shall, in case where a worker retires, pay the retirement allowance within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred; and

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay retirement allowances of KRW 4,961,814 to E, who worked in the above workplace and retired from the workplace 14 days after the date of retirement without any agreement to extend the date of retirement.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of employment contracts and Acts and subordinate statutes notifying dismissal;

1. Article 110 subparagraph 1 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 26 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits, Article 44 subparagraph 1 and Article 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits, and Selection of fines;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that they did not have the obligation to pay the advance notice of dismissal allowance, and they embezzled the company dormitory rent, left a complaint and accusation against the representative of the company, and spread such facts. They violated Article 53 subparag. 9, subparag. 12, and subparag. 14 of the Company Employment Rules by stealing another person's goods stored in the company.

arrow