The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the dismissed part among the public prosecution, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) As there are inevitable circumstances in which the Defendant is unable to pay the workers’ wages and retirement allowances, Defendant 1 should be dismissed from liability.

2) The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion on the grounds for exclusion from liability 1) An employer’s best effort to pay wages or retirement allowances within the due date has been made. However, an employer is exempted from liability only if the inevitable circumstance, which was unable to be paid within the due date due to financial difficulties, is recognized in light of social norms, and the employer cannot be exempted from liability solely on the ground that it was impossible for the employer to pay the same by pressure due to financial difficulties, etc.

In addition, in determining whether there was an inevitable circumstance in which wages or retirement allowances could not be paid by the due date, the issue of whether the employer made full efforts to liquidate the wages or retirement allowances to the extent possible in order to promote the stabilization of the livelihood of retired workers, etc., or made a clear presentation of the future repayment plan and consultation with the worker in good faith, etc., and whether the measures that can be objectively evaluated as reasonable from the standpoint of the retired workers, etc. have been taken can also be a specific requisition (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do9230, Feb. 9, 2006). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, it is recognized that the defendant was difficult to pay the wages or retirement allowances to the worker as the representative director of the company of this case on December 9, 2015, when the defendant assumed office as the representative director of the company of this case (hereinafter “instant company”).

However, the defendant's wages are paid to the workers.