logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2013.03.26 2013고단223
근로기준법위반
Text

All prosecutions against the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Facts charged;

A. Defendant A is an individual architect who resides in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and runs a building business with five full-time workers.

The Defendant is working in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from March 19, 2012 to June 13, 2012 at the site of the Dworkacheon and Walls Construction.

On May 2012, E-employee E’s wage of KRW 2,600,00, worker F’s wage of KRW 2,000,000 for May 2012, 2012, workers G’ wage of KRW 2,60,000 for workers’ wage of KRW 2,60,000 for May 2012, 2012, worker H’s wage of KRW 2,60,000 for workers’ wage of KRW 2,60,000 for workers’ wage of KRW 840,00 for May 20 of 2012, workers I did not pay KRW 10,640,00 for the total wage of KRW 14 days from the date on which the cause for the payment occurred, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

B. Defendant B, as the representative director of KJ 201 in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, employs 10 full-time workers and has no construction business license.

Defendant A is a direct contractor who has given a subcontract for a tent and wall construction to Defendant A.

Where a construction business is subcontracted two or more times, and a subcontractor who is not a constructor fails to pay wages to his workers, an immediate upper contractor shall pay wages to workers employed by the subcontractor jointly and severally with the subcontractor.

The defendant above A.

As referred to in paragraph (1), Defendant A, the subcontractor, is working at the construction site above

The total amount of 10,640,000 won for five retired workers E, etc., was not paid within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date on which the cause for such payment occurred, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

2. We examine the judgment, and the facts charged against Defendant A are crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act. The facts charged against Defendant B are crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 44-2(1) of the Labor Standards Act.

arrow