logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2014.05.20 2013고단1066
근로기준법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the actual operator of the (oil)C at all times, who employs 30 full-time workers and operates ship manufacturing business.

The Defendant shall work at the relevant workplace from April 17, 2012 to January 30, 2013.

The total amount of wages of 6,161,650 won of retired D and 20,513,710 won of the total amount of wages of 4 workers, as shown in the attached Table of Crimes (except for the portion Nos. 1, 2, and 3) was not paid until 14 days from the date on which the cause for payment occurred without an agreement on the extension of payment between the parties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the accused in the fourth protocol of trial;

1. Each written statement;

1. Application of each relevant statute;

1. Relevant Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act and the choice of fines for criminal facts;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant is an actual operator of the (oil)C in leisure time, who employs 30 full-time workers, and operates vessel manufacturing operations.

The Defendant shall work at the relevant workplace from December 12, 201 to December 4, 2012.

As shown in Nos. 1, 2, and 3 of the attached Table 1, 2, and 3, the total amount of wages of retired E, 28,136,240 won, including the total amount of wages of KRW 11,07,860, did not pay 14 days after the date of occurrence of the cause for payment, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment

2. The facts charged in this part of the judgment are those falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the same Act.

However, according to the records, the victim E, F, and G expressed their intent to withdraw punishment on May 20, 2014, which was after the prosecution of this case.

arrow