The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that this judgment.

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court dismissed the prosecution against the Defendant regarding the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the Workers' Retirement Benefit Security Act against the remaining workers except workers D, and sentenced the Defendant to the remainder of the facts charged. As to this, only the Defendant appealed against the guilty part of the lower judgment on the ground that the sentencing was unfair. The part of the lower judgment dismissing the public prosecution in the lower judgment did not appeal all the Defendant and the Prosecutor (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do6793, May 15, 2008). However, the part of the lower court’s dismissal of the public prosecution, which became final and conclusive separately and conclusive, was excluded from the judgment of the lower court.

Therefore, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the conviction part of the judgment below.

2. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. In the case of the crime of this case on board, the defendant who is the representative director of the F stock company has been employed by the said company;

D’s total amount of 16,448,323 won of wages and retirement allowances shall not be paid within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment deadline between the parties. Considering the fact that the Defendant is in need of strict liability corresponding to it, in consideration of the fact that, in accordance with the Special Technology Commercialization Project Agreement, the research development costs of KRW 330,000,000 paid by the H Foundation incorporated into the victim was embezzled by arbitrarily using the total of KRW 30,000,000 for six times during the course of business, the crime was considerably poor in light of the relevant criminal law and content, and that it seems that the agreement with the victim was not reached up to

I see that it is.

However, the defendant confessions all of the crime of this case and reflects his mistake in depth, and 8,407,818 won in the court below for the above worker D.