Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is the actual manager of the E Art Institute in the 3rd floor in the Northern-gu, Seoan-si, Seoan-si, Seoan-si and the 8th floor and the 3rd floor of the D Building in Seoan-gu, Seoan-si, who ordinarily employs four to five workers and operates a private teaching institute business.

When an employer intends to dismiss a worker, he/she shall give the worker an advance notice at least thirty days prior to the dismissal, and when he/she fails to give such advance notice 30 days prior to the dismissal, he/she shall pay not less than thirty days ordinary wages.

Nevertheless, from July 6, 2016 to August 8, 2016, the Defendant notified a worker F who works in the workplace of dismissal by telephone to the worker F on August 8, 2016, and did not immediately pay KRW 2,995,200 corresponding to the ordinary wage for 30 days, which was the date of dismissal.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a labor contract, a labor contract, a transcript of recording;

1. Article 110 of the relevant Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 110 subparagraph 1 and 26 of the Standard Act concerning selective labor, and selection of fines;

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

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Summary of the assertion

A. F is a “worker under probation,” who is not subject to Article 35 of the Labor Standards Act, since the F did not enter into a regular labor contract, and thus constitutes “worker under probation.”

B. Although the F did not submit a certificate of academic background and a written consent to inquire about sex crimes despite the Defendant’s continued demand, that is, it would intentionally interfere with the business or cause property damage in light of social norms, and thus, this constitutes an exception to the prior notice of dismissal under attached Table 9 of the Enforcement Rule of the Labor Standards Act.

2. Determination

A. According to F’s detailed statement as to whether a worker is a worker under probation and the statement of the labor contract (Evidence No. 11 pages, 36 pages), F is recognized as having entered into a regular labor contract that is not under probation period (the Defendant also has entered into a regular labor contract that is not under probation period).