The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the employer who employs four full-time workers as the representative director of the (ju)D in Chuncheon City, and operates the construction business.

Where a construction business is contracted for construction work two or more times and a subcontractor who is not a constructor fails to pay wages to his workers, the immediate preceding contractor shall be liable to pay wages to workers employed by the subcontractor jointly and severally with the subcontractor.

The Defendant ordered the construction of E elementary school facilities and subcontracted the interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior to F, an individual constructor. The F works from February 21, 2013 to March 19, 2013 at the above construction site.

A retired worker G did not pay 7,660,000 won in total, including 1,020,000 won in February 2013, within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the reasons for payment, without an agreement on extension of the due date between the parties concerned, as shown in the attached list of crimes.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as a direct contractor, failed to comply with the above F, even though he was liable to pay the total of KRW 7,660,000 to four workers G, other than those employed by F, jointly with F.

2. The Defendant asserted that F without a construction business license (hereinafter “instant construction”) lent the name of the construction business so that it can be awarded the interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior decoration among E Elementary School Facilities Construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) and that it was not actually awarded a contract from E elementary school. The F merely borrowed the construction license from E elementary school to E elementary school construction license in its consistent manner from the investigation agency to this court, and the Defendant was awarded a contract from E elementary school to E elementary school, and the Defendant made a statement consistent with the Defendant’s assertion that he did not participate in the instant construction, and can be seen by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court.