The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, as the representative of the Daegu Suwon-gu C Language Institute, is an employer who operates the English Private Teaching Institute business.

(a) An employer who violates the Labor Standards Act shall, if a worker dies or retires, pay the worker wages, compensations, and any other money or valuables within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred;

Provided, That the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

The Defendant did not pay KRW 2,105,918 in total amount of wages within 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement on the extension of payment period between the parties concerned, as stated in the list of crimes in attached Form D, including KRW 85,461, December 2012, which was retired from the Defendant’s work at the said workplace from October 29, 2012 to April 30, 2015.

(b) An employer who violates the Act on Guarantee of Retirement Benefits of Workers shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days after the grounds for payment occur, in cases where the worker retires;

Provided, That the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

From October 29, 2012 to April 30, 2015, the Defendant did not pay KRW 3,291,910 of D retirement pay, which was retired from the said workplace, within 14 days from the date of retirement, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment deadline.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are the crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 44 subparag. 1 and Article 9 of the Workers’ Retirement Benefit Security Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the employee’s explicit intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, and the proviso of Article 44 of the Workers’ Retirement Benefit Security Act.

According to the records, D, on August 10, 2016, after the institution of the instant prosecution, expressed his/her intention not to punish the defendant in this court.

Therefore, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.