The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant is not obliged to pay a retirement allowance any longer, since he entered into an agreement to pay a retirement allowance by including the monthly amount of the retirement allowance at his option with the worker E and F, and accordingly, he has paid the retirement allowance to the above worker along with the monthly amount of the retirement

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.

The court below applied Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act to the facts charged in the case of this case, but applied Article 34 of the former Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act enacted by Act No. 7379 on January 27, 2005 and enforced on December 1, 2005 along with the above Act, and Article 34 of the amended Labor Standards Act provides that "the retirement benefit system that the employer pays to the retired worker shall be governed by the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act." Thus, if an employer fails to pay retirement allowances to the employee within 14 days from the date on which the ground for payment occurred after the enforcement of the above Act

(1) The court below's decision that applied the Labor Standards Act to the facts charged in this case is erroneous in applying the Act, and therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained in this regard.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of the court, despite the above reasons for reversal of facts.

3. Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts.