logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.11.04 2015고정609
근로기준법위반
Text

1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 2,000,000 won;

2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the user of the Nam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City B building and the insurance solicitor management business with four full-time workers in the nine floors of Gwangju Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the "instant company").

The Defendant, like the details of calculation of unpaid wages, has worked in the instant company from December 2, 2013 to February 26, 2014, as shown in the attached Table.

The victim D’s wages, who are retired workers, shall be 1,248,371 won, and shall work in the instant company from December 26, 2013 to February 28, 2014.

The victim E, who is a retired worker, did not pay 1,577,081 won within 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement on the extension of the due date.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D, E, and F;

1. Each protocol of interrogation of the accused, G, E, or D by the prosecution, and protocol of interrogation of the accused by the prosecution (not less than 1740 pages of investigation records) by the prosecution;

1. Each police statement of E and D, and each police statement of F;

1. Partial statements made by the police in relation to H and G;

1. Details of the payment of benefits in December (E), I transfer certificates (E), the details of the payment of benefits in December (D), and I transfer certificates (D);

1. Some of the statements in D, E (labor contract, wage settlement statement, and transfer statement);

1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel as to the partial certificate of registered matters (including cancellation matters), name of business registration certificate, daily business report

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel did not have a substantial representative of the instant company during the period of his/her employment as the victim D and E, and thus, they did not have a duty to pay wages to the said victims

In addition, the unpaid wages of the instant company to the victim D are KRW 467,587, and the unpaid wages to the victim E are KRW 960,313.

2. Determination

A. As to whether the Defendant is an employer of the instant company under the Labor Standards Act, Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act are employers. Article 2(1)2 of the Labor Standards Act is “employer.”

arrow