A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

(e).

[The guilty portion] On March 18, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year as a crime of occupational embezzlement from the Suwon Giwon on March 18, 2015 and the judgment became final and conclusive on March 26, 2015.

The defendant, as the representative of H, is the employer who is engaged in the manufacturing business with seven full-time workers, who is a representative of H in terms of harmony.

The Defendant did not pay wages of 1,886,863 won on April 1, 2014, 2014, paid wages of 3,713,477 won on July 2014, 2014, wages of 3,713,713,477 won on August 1, 2014, wages of 3,713,477 won on August 1, 2014, retirement pay of 253,425 won on September 1, 2014, retirement pay of 253,425 won on September 1, 2014, and retirement pay of 3,280,719 won on September 15, 200, and retirement pay of 15,830,649 won on retirement without agreement between the parties concerned.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Details of the calculation of retirement allowances to B and J and the ledger of benefits;

1. Details of arrears;

1. Previous convictions: Inquiry about criminal history, output of the screen of integrated case search, and application of the text of the judgment;

1. Article 109(1), Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act (the fact that the duty to liquidate money or goods for retired workers is not fulfilled), Article 44 Subparag. 1, and Article 9 of the Guarantee of Retirement Benefits for Workers (the fact that the duty to pay retirement allowances to retired workers is not fulfilled) concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Article 25(3)4, Article 32(1)3, and Article 32(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits, etc. of Application for Compensation (the part dismissing the public prosecution on the ground that each of the crimes of this case against the defendant does not constitute an offense subject to a compensation order under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits, and thus, it is reasonable to issue an order for compensation) / [the part dismissing the public prosecution] The defendant in the public lawsuit room is a representative of I Co., Ltd., Ltd., located in Ha in the