logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 김천지원 2017.12.21 2017고정571
근로기준법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the representative of Kimcheon-si (State)C, who ordinarily employs eight workers and operates a livestock product processing business (by-products of pigs) by employing eight workers.

1. Where a worker dies or retires, an employer unpaid wages shall pay wages, compensations, and all other money and valuables within 14 days from the date on which the cause for such payment occurred, except in extenuating circumstances;

In that sense, the Defendant did not pay the total of KRW 13,824,904 from May 9, 2013 to D that retired from office on March 9, 2017 within 14 days from the date of retirement in which the cause of payment occurred, without agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date for payment of money and valuables.

2. An employer who fails to pay a retirement allowance shall, where a person retires, pay such retirement allowance within 14 days after the cause for payment occurs, except in extenuating circumstances.

In doing so, the defendant did not pay KRW 3,026,084 of D's retirement pay retired on March 9, 2017 at the above workplace within 14 days from the date of retirement in which the reason for payment occurred, without agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date for payment of the money.

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, and cannot be prosecuted against the intent expressed by the victim under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, the proviso of Article 44 of the Workers’ Retirement Benefit Security Act.

According to the records, the injured worker can recognize the fact that the injured worker withdraws his previous wish to punish the defendant after the prosecution of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow