logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.10.18 2017고단2567
근로기준법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In the facts charged, the Defendant is an employer who ordinarily employs 10 workers and engages in metal processing business as the representative director of Seongbuk-gu (ju) C in Changwon-gu, Changwon-si.

When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money or valuables within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred.

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

However, Defendant 1 served as a production worker from September 14, 2015 to February 13, 2017 at the above workplace, and was retired from the said workplace, and did not pay KRW 470,617 in January 2017, wages of KRW 1,887,671 in February 2017 and the amount of retirement pay of KRW 4,634,525 in February 201, from August 8, 201 to August 31, 2016, and retired from the business as business management worker and did not pay KRW 586,640 in the settlement refund at the end of the year 2016, KRW 11,383,510 in the retirement allowance of KRW 586,640 in the retirement allowance balance, and KRW 510 in the retirement allowance within 14 days from the date of occurrence of the grounds for payment without an agreement between the parties.

2. Determination and conclusion are crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, or Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits. Under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, or the proviso of Article 44 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits, each of the above acts by the Defendant is not prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent. According to the records, the above workers’ expression of intent not to punish the Defendant after the institution of the instant indictment is recognized. Accordingly, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow