logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.09.26 2017고정1135
근로기준법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is the defendant who is a representative of the Co., Ltd. (Seoul Branch Office) in Mapo-gu Seoul and the second floor and runs wholesale and retail business (trade business) with 12 full-time workers.

(a) When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and all 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, who retired from the above workplace from March 1, 200 to March 17, 2017, did not pay wages of 1,207,530 won on August 8, 2016, wages of 3,383,334 won on September 1, 2016, wages of 3,383,334 won on October 2016, wages of 3,383,334 won on November 1, 2016, wages of 3,383,334 won on December 3, 203,383,334, wages of 3,334 won on December 1, 2016, wages of 3,383,34 won on January 1, 2017, total 18,124,200 won within 14 days from the date of retirement, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of payment period between the parties.

(b) An employer shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days after the grounds for payment occur, if 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 17,083,495 of D's retirement pay, which was retired from the above workplace from March 1, 200 to March 17, 2017, within 14 days from the date of the retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the reasons for payment, without the agreement on the extension of the payment period between the parties.

2. Determination

(a) Applicable Act: Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 44 subparag. 1 and Article 9 of the Workers' Retirement Benefits Guarantee Act;

(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. On September 26, 2017, after the prosecution of this case, a written agreement that D does not want the punishment of the defendant is submitted.

(d) Judgment dismissing a public prosecution: Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act;

arrow