The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of all evidence evidence, F’s actual business owner is not the Defendant, but D, and the obligation to pay wages and retirement allowances is not attributable to D, which is the actual business owner, and the Defendant is not guilty. Therefore, the Defendant is not guilty. 2) As there is no responsibility for F’s previous W, the Defendant is not liable for the part of the facts charged in the instant case that the Defendant did not pay retirement allowances from the part corresponding to the period of the W service of workers.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the argument of mistake of facts regarding the Defendant’s first argument is based on the following circumstances, namely, the following circumstances acknowledged by the records of this case: (i) the Defendant registered the business of F in its own name on or around September 2009; and (ii) the Defendant is the original Cheongsi-Maurco Korea (hereinafter “original business”).

(3) The head of the Tong where the employee’s labor contract with the victimized workers of this case was concluded under the name of the defendant, and the wages of victimized workers were paid to the defendant. The defendant overall control over all of the defendant (Evidence Records 103, 160, 1710, 1738), (4) the defendant extended money from the lending company under his own name at the request of D to use money for its operation funds, and (5) the employee who did not work almost in F, was the defendant as the representative, and the employee was not aware of D’s initial investigation records (Evidence Records 103, 160, 1710, 1738).