Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the representative director of E Co., Ltd. located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government D Building A, Dong 401, who is a full-time worker and operates the business of reproduction by using seven full-time workers.

The Defendant did not pay KRW 1,032,000 in total of workers F’ wages within 14 days from the date of retirement, as shown in the attached Table No. 1, 2015, including KRW 264,000,00 of workers F, who worked from March 18, 2015 to June 19, 2015, as well as KRW 1,032,00 in total of workers F, as stated in the attached Table No. 1.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A statement and a written petition of the F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning a statement of benefits in May 2015;

1. Article 109 of the relevant Act concerning criminal facts, Articles 109 (1) and 36 of the Standards for Optional Labor, and the selection of fines;

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

1. The part dismissing a public prosecution under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the order of provisional payment

1. The summary of the facts charged is the defendant as the representative director of E, a corporation located in Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, A Dong 401, who runs the business of reproduction and creation using seven full-time workers.

The Defendant did not pay KRW 1,032,00 in total amount of wages of two workers within 14 days from the date of retirement, as stated in the attached Table Nos. 2 and 3, including KRW 1,196,000 in June 1, 2015, of workers B, who worked from around April 1, 2015 to July 9, 2015.

2. Each of the facts charged in this part of the judgment is an offense falling under Article 109(1) of the Labor Standards Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent pursuant to Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act.

However, according to the records of this case, since a written withdrawal of each complaint by victimized workers B and C was submitted to the effect that the defendant does not want to be punished to this court on May 20, 2016 and June 13, 2016, which was after the prosecution was filed, this part of the prosecution is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.