A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who employs three regular workers on the fourth floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F building and operates a broadcasting program producer (mainG)G.

The Defendant is working for the said company from May 4, 201 to April 3, 2012.

A retired employee shall work in the company from January 1, 201 to June 30, 2012, including the sum of 7,492,307 won per month wage of 7,492,307 won per month, and from January 1, 201 to June 30, 201, and from January 1, 201 to June 30, 201

A retired employee E’s wages and retirement allowances, including the total of KRW 5,00,000 and retirement allowances and the total of KRW 3,915,395 won per month during the 18-month period from January 201 to June 2012, were not paid within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E, H and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the suspect examination protocol to the accused;

1. Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 44 Subparag. 1 and Article 9 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 (Offences of the Labor Standards Act against E, Offenses of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, and Punishment provided for a violation of the Labor Standards Act with heavier penalty) of the ordinary concurrent crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment stipulated in the violation of the Labor Standards Act with heavy penalty E);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do148, Apr.

1. Determination of the defendant and defense counsel's assertion under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order

1. The summary of the claim is that H did not serve as an employee in the G Co., Ltd.

2. Whether a worker is subject to the Supreme Court precedents, regardless of the form of contract, is dependent on the employee’s wages in substance.