logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2018.11.01 2018고단477
근로기준법위반등
Text

All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is an employer who has operated the KH in Ansan-gu, a member G from September 1, 2016 to October 24, 2017.

(a) When a worker dies or retires, an employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act shall pay him/her wages, compensations, or other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;

Provided, That the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, at the above workplace, worked from June 9, 2016 to October 24, 2017 and retired from the workplace, did not pay the total of KRW 50,574,017, including KRW 1,840,550 on October 2017 of I retired from the workplace, within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties to the extension of payment deadline, as shown in the attached crime list.

(b) An employer who violates the guarantee of retirement benefits of an employee shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days after the ground for such payment occurred, in cases where the employee retires;

Provided, That the payment date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay 216,125,480 won, including 3,912,980 won of retirement allowances of I who worked and retired in the above workplace as described in paragraph (a), within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties to the extension of the payment deadline, as described in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

2. We examine the judgment. The facts charged in the instant case are the crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the former Labor Standards Act (Amended by Act No. 15108, Nov. 28, 2017); Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act; and Articles 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso to Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act that cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act; and records of the instant case.

arrow