A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

(e).

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the representative of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (State)D who is engaged in software development business by employing 35 full-time workers.

The defendant shall work at the place of business from December 17, 2007 to January 31, 2013.

A retirement allowance of KRW 21,914,328 has not been paid to retired E within 14 days from the date of occurrence of the cause for the payment without agreement between the parties to the extension of the due date, and a retirement allowance of KRW 463,88,230 has not been paid to 15 persons, such as F, within 14 days from the date of occurrence of the cause for payment without any agreement between the parties to the extension of the due date.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of G and H;

1. A written statement of I and J;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint and written petition, each wage delay and written confirmation of delay, verification of authenticity (13 copies), details of confirmation of fact, such as telephone, and revision of details of delay (29 persons including H, etc.);

1. Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act applicable to criminal facts; Articles 31 and 9 of the former Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act (amended by Act No. 10967, Jul. 25, 2011; hereafter the same shall apply) and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Although the total amount of unpaid wages and retirement allowances, etc. of the Defendant for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act does not appear to be significant, the Defendant recognized all of the instant crime, against his fault, and the Defendant did not have been in arrears with wages, etc. in bad faith, but has been forced to pay wages, etc. to employees due to difficulties in business management due to the accumulated accounts of the company and its clients.