The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, from October 6, 2014 to October 22, 2015, D worked as the head of the Livestock Distribution Division in C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) operated by the Defendant, and retired on or around October 22, 2015. Of them, from around August 2015, the Defendant’s breach of trust was committed, to avoid committing a crime rather than providing normal labor, and rather, to avoid committing a crime.

Thus, there is no obligation of the defendant to pay wages, etc. to D, or there is a reasonable ground to dispute the existence of the obligation to pay wages, etc. to D, and there was an intention of the defendant to commit a crime of violation of the Labor Standards Act on the grounds that there was

It is difficult to see it.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. 1) Determination of the misapprehension of the legal principle on factual mistake or misapprehension of the legal principle 1) In the event there are grounds for dispute as to the existence and scope of the obligation to pay wages and retirement allowances, there are reasonable grounds for the employer to have not paid the said wages and retirement allowances

Therefore, it should be viewed that an employer had the intent to commit a violation of Article 36 and Article 109(1) of the Labor Standards Act, and Article 9 and Article 44 subparag. 1 of the Workers' Retirement Benefit Security Act.

It is difficult to view that there is a ground to dispute over the existence and scope of the obligation to pay wages and retirement allowances should be determined in light of the grounds for refusal of payment by an employer, the grounds for such refusal, the organization and size of the company operated by the employer, various matters such as business purposes, and all other circumstances at the time of dispute over the existence and scope of the obligation to pay wages and retirement allowances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do1539, Jun. 28, 2007; 2009Do8248, Oct. 13, 2011). Meanwhile, with respect to workers.