The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, as indicated in the judgment of the court below, paid the following workers' wages among workers who worked in D cafeteria (hereinafter referred to as “D cafeteria”) and “G for the settlement of accounts (hereinafter referred to as “the instant cafeteria”),” and the “G for the settlement of accounts,” and in combination with the instant cafeteria, the Plaintiff paid all or part of the wages to the following workers. In the case of W, the calculation of the service period was erroneous.

Therefore, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged. (1) In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the charge, and paid KRW 2,782,100,000 for the wages of December of the preceding year to Workers V (No. 2 attached to the List of Crimes in the judgment), and KRW 50,000 for January of 8, 2013, and paid KRW 2,782,10 for December of the preceding year.

2) On January 29, 2014, and February 27, 2014, the Defendant paid KRW 180,000 to W (the instant crime list No. 3) in installments, and on March 6, 2014, the Defendant’s defense counsel stated on January 8, 2014 in the appellate brief, but appears to be a clerical error.

In February, 844,363 won was paid.

3) Y (Nos. 5 above crime inundations) is a person who had worked on March 1, 2013 and has also been adjusted according to the above service period.

4) On March 7, 2013, the Defendant paid KRW 1,200,00 to AA (No. 8 of the crime sight table at issue).

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to the assertion that he paid wages to V, namely, H, the person in charge of accounting, compared to the content of the passbook of pay amount, submitted in advance to the investigation agency by arranging the wages not paid from the Defendant (No. 162,50 of the evidence record No. 5340 of the High Court Order 2016, No. 162, No. 509 of the evidence), and on this basis, V specifically stated the overdue wages not paid to the Defendant and the amount of delayed retirement, etc., and the Defendant and his defense counsel have reasons for appeal.