logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 통영지원 2013.11.08 2013고단76
근로기준법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a manager of U in T at the time of a show, who runs a vessel processing business by employing approximately 60 full-time workers.

The Defendant, who was employed by the foregoing company on May 1, 2012, did not pay the wages of KRW 2,143,314 to his/her retired worker on June 25, 2012 within 14 days from the date of his/her retirement, without any agreement on the extension of the payment deadline.

In addition, the Defendant did not pay 115,096,390 won in total, within 14 days from the date of each retirement, as stated in the No. 1 to 6, 14, 16 through 18, 20 through 24, 26, 27, 31 through 34, 37 through 39, and 42 through 60 in addition to this, the Defendant did not pay 115,096,390 won in total, without any agreement on the extension of the due date with employees.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement related to J, L and W;

1. Application of X-based Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and the choice of fines (including the fact that substitute payments are made to 31 workers, etc.);

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

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

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the dismissal part of the indictment concerning the provisional payment order provides that the defendant did not pay the total of KRW 53,113,83 of the wages of 17 workers as stated in the separate sheet Nos. 7 through 13, 15, 19, 25, 28 through 30, 35, 36, 40, and 41 within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement on extension of the payment deadline between the parties concerned.

However, since this part of the facts charged falls under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, it cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent under Article 109(2) of the same Act.

However, according to the records, workers C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N,O, P (Attached No. 35), Q, R, and S respectively.

arrow