beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15 million.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. In a judgment on construction business, where a contract under Article 2 subparag. 11 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry was made two or more occasions, and where a subcontractor, who is not a constructor under Article 2 subparag. 7 of the same Act, fails to pay wages to his/her employees, the immediately upper-tier subcontractor is jointly and severally liable with a sewage supplier for the payment of wages to his/her employees. This is the purport of holding him/her liable when the immediately upper-tier subcontractor actually committed an illegal act to subcontract construction works to a person whose financial power, etc. for construction works are not verified because the immediately upper-tier contractor was not registered for the construction business, thereby causing abstract dangers about the failure to pay wages to a sewage supplier.
The Defendant appears to have entered into a subcontract with E Co., Ltd., as the representative director of E Co., Ltd., the direct supply and demand of H, who is a personal building business operator who subcontracted the dub construction of the F Multi-household Construction in Yangju-si, under the name of O (representative P), but even if O is the subject of the actual subcontract.
Even though O also is an individual enterprise that is not a constructor defined in Article 2 subparag. 7 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry (Evidence 103 of the evidence record), there is no difficulty in deeming E Co., Ltd. as H’s direct contractor (Article 44-2(2) of the Labor Standards Act). In addition, even though H failed to pay the total of twenty-four workers employed on the construction site from January 5, 2016 to February 13, 2016, the sum of wages of 58,025,000 workers employed on the construction site was not paid. In light of the scale of overdue wages and the legislative intent of the above provision, the Defendant, who is jointly responsible for wage payment, is also not obligated to pay wages to workers employed by sewage.
The remainder of the agreed 13 workers shall be excluded as follows.