logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2018.04.27 2017고정1222
근로기준법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 2.5 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won per day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

An employer shall pay wages, compensations, and all other money and valuables within 14 days after the cause for payment occurred, except where the date has been extended by mutual agreement where a worker dies or retires, due to special circumstances.

The Defendant employed a person, such as a tree, and newly built the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Ground Building C, and had worked from January 14, 2017 to March 9, 2017 at the above workplace, and had not paid KRW 23,350,000 as well as KRW 1.8 million of the daily worker D retired from office on January 14, 2017, within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement on the extension of the payment period between the parties.

D E E 1,800,000 200,000 200,2000 2,200,000,000 2,200,0000 on February 6, 2017, 6,750,000 4,500,500,000 8,000 2,0000 2,0000,000 19,000,000 15,950,000 15,950,000 2,400,600,000 1,200,200, 2005, 200,950, 6300, 2000, 2000, 2000, 2000,300, 309, 300, 2005, 300

1. Partial statement of a witness I;

1. Each police statement made to D or J;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the submission of output, output, and overdue details;

1. Articles 109 (1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act concerning facts constituting a crime. Article 109 (Selection of Punishment)

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The alleged defendant contracted the construction of the building of this case to I, and the I employed the father, such as D, and thus, the defendant is not the employer of the above father.

2. According to the evidence revealed earlier, the owner of the instant building is the Defendant and the Defendant’s children and four other, and K entered into a contract for the construction of the instant building with I on November 9, 2015, and I around that time, employed the father and constructed a new building, and around October 2016.

arrow