Do 2017 13781 A. Violation of the Labor Standards Act

B. Violation of the Minimum Wage Act

C. Violation of the Labor Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act

D. Violation of the Act on the Promotion of Workers’ Participation and Cooperation

E. Violation of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Dispatched Workers

1. (a) b. c. d. e.

A

2. (c) B

3. (c) d. C

4.(c) D.

5. (c) E;

6.(c)F

7.(c) G;

8. H stock company;

Defendant and Prosecutor (Defendant 1)

HC, a legal entity, (in order to hear defendants)

Attorney in charge HD, HE, HG

K (for Defendant 1) a legal entity K

Attorney in charge HT, L, HU, M, HV, HW

Daejeon District Court Decision 2017No 663 decided August 16, 2017

December 22, 2017

all appeals shall be dismissed.

The grounds of appeal (the statement in the supplement of the grounds of appeal by the defense counsel that was submitted after the lapse of the period for submitting the grounds of appeal is within the scope that supplements the grounds of appeal) shall be determined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the original judgment in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly adopted as to the grounds for appeal by the Defendant, it is reasonable to have determined that all of the facts charged by the Defendant against the Defendant (excluding the part not guilty) of the instant indictment against the Defendant on the grounds as stated in the judgment of the original court on the grounds as stated in the judgment of the lower court is recognized as guilty. In short, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the intention to engage in an unfair labor act or unfair labor practice, labor practice, emergency escape and criticism, illegality, legitimacy of commencement and maintenance of workplace, legitimacy of collective bargaining refusal, etc. by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, such as the allegation of the grounds for appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the original judgment in light of the record as to the grounds for appeal by the public prosecutor, it is justifiable to reverse the judgment of the first instance, which found Defendant A guilty of the violation of the Labor Standards Act due to unpaid wages during the period of work closure, on the grounds as stated in the judgment of the court below, on the ground that there was no proof of the crime. On the other hand, the judgment of the court of first instance, which found Defendant A guilty of the violation of the Labor Standards Act due to unpaid wages during the period of work closure, is reversed, and the judgment of not guilty was rendered. As for the grounds for appeal, it did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the intention of the breach of the duty to pay wages, or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the negligence of the duty to pay wages, as alleged in the grounds for appeal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Justices Kim Shin-chul

State Park Sang-ok

Justices Park Jung-hwa