logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.12.22 2016고정223
근로기준법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is the defendant as the representative director of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Co., Ltd. D (hereinafter referred to as the company in this case) with the first floor, who ordinarily employs four workers and operates a scambling.

An employer shall pay workers wages on a fixed date at least once a month.

Provided, That this shall not apply to extraordinary wages, allowances, or other similar payments, or those wages prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 1,315,376 out of the wages on January 15, 2014, which he/she had worked as a shop from November 19, 2013 at the above workplace, as well as KRW 32,133,208 in total on the 15th day of each month, a regular wage payment date, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

2. The term "employer" under Article 2 of the Labor Standards Act means a business owner, a person in charge of business management, or a person who acts on behalf of a business owner with respect to matters relating to workers. The term "business owner" refers to a business owner, and the term "person who acts on behalf of a business owner with respect to matters relating to workers, such as personnel affairs, wages, welfare, labor management, etc., or an order or direction for business, etc., and the term "person who acts on behalf of a business owner" refers to a person who has certain authority and responsibility from a business owner with respect to matters relating to the determination of working conditions, such as an order or direction for business, and the determination of

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6285 Decided November 26, 2004, and Supreme Court Decision 2008Do5984 Decided October 9, 2008, etc.). However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the store of this case is nominal.

arrow