logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2013.11.29 2013고정1873
근로기준법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a personal business operator who resides in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City and 604 (D apartment) and operates a construction business on a regular basis.

The Defendant did not pay 1.2 million won wages of F working from June 22, 2012 to July 2, 2012 at the Busan Gangseo-gu apartment construction site within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the cause for payment, without any agreement on the extension of the payment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement of the police with regard to B and F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant Article of the Acts concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 109 and 36 of the Labor Standards Act selection of penalties;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the facts charged is a personal entrepreneur residing in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, 604(D apartment), who runs a construction business with two regular employees.

The Defendant did not pay 1.2 million won wages of B, which were worked from June 22, 2012 to July 2, 2012 at the construction site of Busan Gangseo-gu apartment construction site, within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the cause for payment, without any agreement on the extension of the payment.

2. This part of the facts charged is an offense falling under Article 109(1) of the Labor Standards Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent pursuant to Article 109(2) of the same Act.

However, since B withdrawn the Defendant’s wish to punish on November 13, 2013, which was after the instant indictment, this part of the prosecution is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow