logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 군산지원 2018.05.30 2017고단835
근로기준법위반등
Text

All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is a person who runs a manufacturing business by using five full-time workers, as the representative of D (ju) in Gunsan City C, and as a full-time employee.

(a) When a worker dies or retires, an employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act shall pay him/her wages, compensations, or other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay 35,907,280 won in total for three workers within 14 days from the date of each retirement without an agreement on the extension of payment deadline between the parties, as stated in the list of crimes in the attached Table, including KRW 4,632,982 of the wages of retired workers E, who worked in the above workplace from August 24, 2014 to March 20, 2017, as well as KRW 4,632,982 of the wages of retired workers E.

(b) An employer who violates the guarantee of retirement benefits of an employee shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days after the ground for such payment occurred, in cases where the employee retires;

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 36,898,023 in total for five employees, including KRW 5,427,056 of retirement allowances of retired workers, from the above workplace from September 1, 2014 to November 30, 2016, within 14 days from the date of each retirement without any agreement on the extension of payment date between the parties concerned, as stated in the attached list of crimes.

2. Determination

(a) Applicable legal provisions: Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, the main sentence of Article 44 subparag. 1, and Article 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits;

(b) Crimes of non-violation of an intention: Article 109 (2) of the Labor Standards Act, the proviso to Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act;

C. Expression of intent that the relevant worker does not want to be punished against the defendant after the prosecution of this case was instituted.

(d) Judgment dismissing public prosecution:

arrow