logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2015.11.24 2015고정462
근로기준법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is an employer who runs a manufacturing business with 18 workers, who are operated by the former Yong-gun in Yong-gun B.

When a worker retires, the employer shall pay all money and valuables, such as wages, within 14 days from the date of retirement, unless otherwise agreed by the parties concerned about the extension of the due date for the payment.

The Defendant in violation of the Labor Standards Act stated in the indictment of KRW 13,782,980 in the aggregate of the wages of three workers, such as the statement of the attached Form 13,782,980, such as the total amount of D wages of KRW 4,739,814, which worked from November 13, 2013 to March 19, 2015 at the above workplace, but appears to be a clerical error in the indictment of KRW 10,163,350.

B In the absence of agreement on extension of the due date for payment between the parties, the payment has not been made within 14 days from the date of retirement

B. The Defendant in violation of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act did not pay 18,079,882 won in total, including three employees, within 14 days from the date of retirement, as stated in the detailed statement of the money and valuables in arrears, including 4,134,921 won in attached Form D’s retirement pay.

2. The facts charged in this case are the crimes falling under subparagraphs 1 and 9 of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, Articles 109 (1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and shall not be prosecuted against the express will of the victims under the proviso to Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act and Article 109 (2) of the Labor Standards Act.

However, according to the records of this case, it is recognized on November 19, 2015, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted by all employees of the facts charged of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow