logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.04.26 2018고정250
근로기준법위반
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the actual manager of DD located in Namyang-si, who employs five full-time workers and operates restaurant business.

(a) When an employer intends to dismiss a worker, he/she shall do so at least thirty days prior to such dismissal, and when he/she fails to do so prior to such thirty days, he/she shall pay not less than thirty days ordinary wages;

Nevertheless, on June 5, 2017, the Defendant dismissed F, who was employed as the head of the kitchen on June 10, 2017 at the same workplace and worked as the head of the kitchen on June 10, 2017, and did not immediately pay KRW 3,500,000 equivalent to the ordinary wage for 30 days with the advance notice payment for dismissal.

(b) An employer shall clearly state wages, prescribed working hours, holidays under Article 55, annual paid leaves under Article 60, and other working conditions prescribed by Presidential Decree to workers when concluding an employment contract, and shall deliver to the workers a written statement specifying the method and method of calculating wages, prescribed working hours, holidays under Article 55, annual paid leaves under Article 60.

Nevertheless, while concluding a labor contract with F having worked for from June 5, 2017 to June 10, 2017 at the same place of business, the Defendant did not deliver to the employee a written statement specifying the method of calculating wages items, the method of calculating wages, the prescribed working hours, the holidays under Article 55, the annual paid leaves under Article 60.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The witness A’s legal statement (the defendant did not unilaterally dismiss F, but the F expressed first his intention to retire and terminated his labor contract so that F does not have the obligation to pay the pre-employment allowance.

However, the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, namely, ① the Defendant employed F on June 5, 2017, as a branch guard, as the branch guard, and on June 10, 2017, F as a parking lot and food operated by the Defendant.

arrow