The prosecution against the defendant is dismissed.

1. Co-defendant C of the facts charged in the instant case is an employer who ordinarily employs 12 workers at the construction site of the E-building project at the time of leisure and water supply and is engaged in the construction project, such as mold construction work, without a construction license at the construction site of the E-building project at the time of leisure and water supply, and the Defendant is a person who actually operates the F and is awarded a contract for the said construction from G (State) and is in the position of a subcontractor in direct position equivalent to the subcontract amount of KRW 200,000 per square year to joint Defendant C.

A. Joint Defendant C Co-Defendant C did not pay the total of KRW 30,880,000 wages of 14 workers within 14 days from each retirement date without an agreement on the extension of payment date, as stated in the list of crimes in the attached Table, as well as KRW 4,300,00, which retired on June 2016, 201, that he/she was working at the construction site of the said housing from May 21, 2016 to July 7, 2016.

B. Although the Defendant F Co., Ltd. is liable to pay the said 30,880,000 won to the said 14 workers jointly and severally with the said Da because it was not a constructor but a sewage-grade C, as set forth in the said paragraph (a), the Defendant, a representative of the LAF, was not paid within 14 days from the date of each retirement without any agreement on extension of the payment deadline.

2. The above facts charged constitute Article 109(1) and Article 44-2(1) of the former Labor Standards Act (amended by Act No. 15108, Nov. 28, 2017; hereinafter the same), and thus, the Defendant cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent pursuant to Article 109(2) of the former Labor Standards Act.

In this regard, the withdrawal of each complaint, which states that workers listed in the attached list of crimes do not want to be punished against the defendant, was submitted to this court on June 22, 2018 after the prosecution of this case, and thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.