logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2017.09.21 2017고정324
근로기준법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant, as the representative of C located in B at the time of Si interest in the facts charged, is an employer who ordinarily employs ten workers and conducts industrial washing business.

(a) When an employee retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and all 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 did not pay 14,230,80 won, including the annual paid leave allowances of d's retired workers who worked from the above workplace from April 25, 2009 to April 30, 2016, in total, 14,230,800 won, without agreement between the parties on the extension of payment date, as shown in the list of crimes in attached Table, for retirement workers D, within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of payment cause.

(b) An employer shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred, in cases where the employee retires;

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

Nevertheless, the defendant did not pay 40,067,140 won, including 6,391,870 won of retirement allowances of retired workers D, who were employed in the above workplace for the period specified in the paragraph (a) at the above workplace, within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the reasons for payment, without agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment deadline.

2. The facts charged of the instant case are the crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act or the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act. The records are followed.

arrow