A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the violation of the Labor Standards Act concerning Workers D.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a business owner who manufactures vessel components by employing more than 100 full-time workers under the trade name of G within the F (State) in Tong Young-si.

The Defendant, from February 8, 2011 to around June 27, 2011, worked in the above workplace as a member of ideas and ideas and worked in the above workplace, and on May 27, 201, the Defendant, as indicated in the following: (a) the sum of wage of KRW 3,728,200, including the wage of KRW 1,495,70, May 27, 201 of the retired workers H, including KRW 1,728,20,00,00 per annum 1 to 87,89,89, and 110,000, total sum of the amount of personal delayed payment of wages of KRW 236,136,720, and the amount of personal delayed payment of KRW 244,05,720, which was dismissed, did not pay the remainder, excluding KRW 888 D wages of KRW 7,919,00,00 from each retirement day without an agreement on the extension of payment date.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with H;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. A complaint;

1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquire into criminal history, report on investigation (report on the result of confirmation of the previous convictions of the disposition and report on the date of release);

1. Relevant legal provisions, Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act concerning criminal facts, and the choice of imprisonment for each type of crime;

1. Sentencing factors favorable to the reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes: The substitute payment of KRW 213,180,770 is made in a portion of the unpaid amount, and the defendant is against the law;

The more unfavorable sentencing factors: The amount of the unpaid wages is considerably high, the substitute payment was made to the damaged workers, but the actual defendant did not endeavor to recover the damage in this trial process, and the defendant's economic situation is less likely to implement the procedure of claiming reimbursement for substitute payments, and the situation after the crime is not good.