The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the Plaintiff who runs a construction business with ten full-time workers, representing C(ju) representative in the Won-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Btel 304-306, Seocheon-si.

The Defendant worked in the said workplace from January 21, 208 to October 31, 2012, and paid three of the retired workers, including 2,783,30 won for September 201, and 12,548,300 won for retirement allowances from September 9, 2011 to September 8, 2012, and paid 3,619,480 won for retired workers, and paid 1,845,730 won for retirement allowances from October 12, 209 to October 31, 201, respectively, within 14 days after retirement without agreement on the extension of payment period between the parties concerned.

2. In light of the judgment, the above facts charged are those falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 44 Subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, and Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, and Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent.

However, according to the letter of withdrawal received by the court, it can be recognized that the above workers have withdrawn their wish to punish the defendant after the indictment of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.