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

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the representative of C Co., Ltd. in Gyeongbuk-gun, who runs a building business with 19 full-time workers.

The Defendant did not pay the amount of KRW 2,362,50 on July 1, 2012, to E, who retired from the job site of the DoMoMoel Construction from the date of July 1, 2012 to July 18, 2012, within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

In addition, the Defendant did not pay the total of KRW 12,382,50 to 18 workers who worked at the above site, such as the list of crimes in the attached list, within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement on the extension of the due date between the parties concerned.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding F;

1. Each police statement of E, G, and H;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on written consent for no position;

1. Relevant Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act and the choice of fines for criminal facts;

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. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant asserts that there is no obligation to pay wages to the employees as indicated in the judgment because, on July 2012, the Defendant agreed between the prime contractor comprehensive construction company and the prime contractor company to pay wages directly to the employees. On the other hand, the Defendant made a direct statement of refusal to pay wages to the prime contractor comprehensive construction company. However, acknowledged by the records of the instant case, it is not deemed that the prime contractor did not have agreed to pay wages to all of the employees as indicated in the judgment regardless of the remainder of the term contractor C, and the said agreement appears to have been concluded to guarantee the payment of wages to the employees as indicated in the judgment.