The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a manager of the C office in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, who ordinarily employs 40 workers and operates the clothing manufacturing business.

1. When a worker dies or retires, an employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act shall pay him/her wages, compensations, or other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;

However, if there are special circumstances, the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties, but the defendant was employed from October 11, 2012 to February 28, 2015 at the above workplace and did not pay 27,190,657 won in total (including annual allowances, etc.) within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement on the extension of the payment date between the parties, as stated in the list of crimes, including the amount of wages of KRW 473,65, Oct. 10, 2012 that was retired.

2. An employer who violates the Guarantee of Retirement Benefits of a worker shall pay a retirement allowance within fourteen days after the ground for such payment occurred, in case where the worker retires; and

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

Nevertheless, the defendant had been working in the above workplace from October 1, 2012 to February 28, 2015 and did not pay KRW 7,624,526 of D retirement pay within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment deadline.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Article 109(1) of the Labor Standards Act, Article 44 subparag. 1 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent pursuant to Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act. Since the victim expressed his/her intention not to have the Defendant punished in this court on January 5, 2016, which was after the instant indictment was instituted, the prosecution in the instant case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.