The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant was unable to pay retirement allowances to E inevitably due to business difficulties, and did not intend to violate the Labor Standards Act and the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act.

B. The lower court’s sentence (1.5 million won in penalty) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of fact 1) If there are grounds for dispute as to the existence of obligation to pay wages, etc., there is considerable reason for the employer to have not paid the said wages, etc.

Therefore, the employer had the intent to commit a crime of violation of Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act.

In light of the circumstances at the time of dispute over the existence and scope of the obligation to pay wages, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1539, Jun. 28, 2007, etc.). Meanwhile, the violation of the Labor Standards Act following the breach of the obligation to liquidate money and valuables and the violation of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, even though the employer has made best efforts to pay it, the existence and scope of the obligation to pay wages can be exempted only where the inevitable circumstances, such as financial difficulties, are recognized in light of the common sense of society, and the employer was unable to pay it by pressure due to financial difficulties, etc. merely because the employer was unable to do so due to financial difficulties, etc.

In this regard, the main text of Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act and the main text of Article 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits stipulate the duty to pay wages or retirement allowances within the fixed period, and violates Article 109(1) of the Labor Standards Act and Article 44(1) of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits.