logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.12.19 2017고정1711
근로기준법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the representative of Corporation D in Gwangju Mine-gu, who runs a construction business using two full-time workers.

1. The unpaid Defendant did not pay KRW 8,910,000,000 in total for employees E who retired from office around October 23, 2015 at the same place of business, and did not pay KRW 20,070,000 in total for two workers, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table, within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of occurrence of the cause of payment, without a mutual agreement between the parties to the payment.

2. The Defendant, on October 14, 2015, did not pay KRW 2,500,000,000 of ordinary wages for at least 30 days, even though he/she was dismissed without giving notice of worker F at the above workplace.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of the respective statutory statements statutes of witness E, G, H and F;

1. Article 109 (1), Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act for Criminal Facts, Articles 110 subparagraph 1, 26 of the Labor Standards Act, and the selection of fines for negligence;

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

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. Determination on the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which costs of lawsuit

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that there was no intention to pay the unpaid wages to the defendant, since the transfer of the unpaid wages to the corporation was responsible for sub-payment.

However, this is the relationship between D and D, which the defendant operated, and D, and D, which, in relation to workers, recognize the fact that workers did not agree to it, they still bear the obligation to pay wages in relation to workers, and the defendant is not liable to pay wages.

arrow