logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2019.07.08 2019고단331
근로기준법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant, as the representative director of C in the facts charged, is an employer who runs the business of maintaining and repairing communications facilities and equipment by employing two regular workers.

When a worker retires, an employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money or valuables within 14 days after the ground for such payment occurred.

Provided, That the date may be extended by an agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay the total of KRW 1,800,000 for workers D who worked from January 1, 2009 to November 30, 2017 at the above workplace and KRW 3,600,000 for wages of July 7, 2017 and November 1, 2017, within 14 days from retirement without an agreement on extension of the due date between the parties concerned.

(b) An employer who violates the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act shall, in case where a worker retires, pay the retirement allowance within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred; and

Provided, That the date of payment may be extended by an agreement between the parties if special circumstances exist.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay the total amount of KRW 42,496,081, which was the total amount of KRW 14,247,123, and the total amount of KRW 28,248,958, which was worked from March 2, 2006 to September 15, 2017 at the above workplace, within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement on extension of the due date between the parties concerned.

2. Determination and conclusion: (a) the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits apply respectively to Article 109(1) of the Labor Standards Act; and (b) Article 44 Subparag. 1 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits; and (c) the crime cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso to

However, according to the records of this case, the Labor Standards Act is violated.

arrow