The judgment below

The remainder of conviction except the compensation order shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. The lower court rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecution against Defendant A on the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the Act on Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits, among the facts charged against Defendant A, and sentenced Defendant A to the charge of embezzlement, the remainder of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the Act on Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits. Since Defendant A filed an appeal against the guilty part and the dismissal of the above indictment became final and conclusive, the scope of the trial against Defendant A is limited to the aforementioned guilty part of the lower judgment.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (two and half years of imprisonment, and one and half years of imprisonment, and one and half years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. In light of the fact that the Defendants’ embezzlement was significantly damaged, that the damage was not completely recovered, and that the total amount of unpaid wages and retirement allowances paid by Defendant A is considerable, the Defendants should be punished.

However, in the case of Defendant A, most workers would have received wages and retirement allowances in the voluntary auction procedure for real estate held in the name of U and receive them as the top priority and receive them to recover actual damage to workers. It is recognized that the sentence of the court below is unfair in light of the following conditions: (a) the equitable consideration should be taken into account when the judgment was rendered with the previous conviction; (b) all the Defendants are waiting to commit a crime; (c) the Defendants are against the situation where all the Defendants are committing a crime; (d) the unexpected bad behavior, such as the occurrence of a factory fire, etc. in the circumstances where the management has deteriorated; and (e) the Defendants’ age, character, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) all the sentencing conditions such as the following circumstances.

4. In conclusion, the defendants' appeal is with merit. Thus, the part of the judgment below's compensation order is excluded pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.