Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,500,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is an employer as a representative director of D Co., Ltd. with the 13th floor and 1311 in Changwon-si, Msan-si, who operates a housing project by employing two full-time workers.

1. When a worker dies or retires, the employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money or valuables within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred;

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 21,68,580 in total, as stated in the attached Form, as well as KRW 943,240 in February 2, 2012, which had been employed technically in the said workplace from March 2, 2011 to November 30, 2013 at the said workplace, within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the relevant cause for payment, without agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

2. An employer who violates the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act shall, in case where a worker retires, pay the retirement allowance within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred; and

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 1,842,642 of E’s retirement allowances from March 2, 2011 to November 30, 2013 at the same place of business within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the cause for payment, without agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement of E prepared by a special judicial police officer;

1. Statement E in the interrogation protocol of the accused prepared by the special judicial police officer on October 25, 2014;

1. The defendant asserts that the defendant is only the same business relationship with the defendant, and that E is not an employee as provided in the Labor Standards Act.

However, according to the above evidence, E is.