logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2018.02.08 2017고단927
근로기준법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won per day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the representative of a personal construction company residing in Chuncheon City, and is an employer who executes construction works with eight full-time workers.

When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred.

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay the total of KRW 18,490,000 for retirement workers as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table, including that the sum of KRW 630,000 for October 14, 2016, and the monthly wage of KRW 3,800,000 for which the Defendant worked as a paint for the hours from October 14, 2016 to November 28, 2016, as well as that the sum of KRW 4,430,00 for the employees who were retired from office is not paid as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E, F and G;

1. The defendant asserts to the effect that, regardless of the defendant, he does not have a duty to pay the wage to the defendant since he/she is a wage arising from his/her direct employee, regardless of the defendant, as a part arising from the first underground floor and the first floor of the ground level, the payment details of the wage for interior work, the payment details of interior work, the attendance ledger for wooden workers, the details of each overdue wage, the transaction details, the construction work specifications, the construction work subcontracting contract, the work schedule, the process schedule, and the reply [the defendant and the defense counsel are awarded a subcontract for only 2 and 3 floors in the process of remodeling a health club, and the wage in this case is a wage arising from the employment of the directly employee.

However, comprehensively taking account of the evidence such as witness E, F, and G’s respective legal statements and construction subcontracting contracts, the Defendant is recognized to have been subcontracted the entire construction works for remodeling a health club without distinguishing the area, and the instant workers are employed by the Defendant.

In addition, when the defendant is not present in some construction process, G, the contractor, shall instruct the work to the workers.

arrow