Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the representative of D in the fourth floor of the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, who is a user who employs two full-time workers and operates wholesale and retail business.

When an employer intends to dismiss a worker, he/she shall make a prior announcement at least 30 days, and if he/she fails to make a prior announcement at least 30 days, he/she shall pay the ordinary wages for at least 30 days.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 2,165,970, and KRW 1,93,952, who worked from August 8, 2012 to September 30, 2013 at the same place of business, and F, who worked from August 27, 2012 to September 30, 2013, without notice, for 30-day advance notice of dismissal, and KRW 1,93,952, who was dismissed on September 30, 2013.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to E and F;

1. Relevant Article 110 of the Labor Standards Act and Articles 110 subparagraph 1 and 26 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of fines;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and defense counsel asserted in Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the defendant and defense counsel asserted that they do not have an obligation to pay advance payment of dismissal allowances because they fall under the proviso of Article 26 of the Labor Standards Act at the time that the defendant's workplace is unable to continue business

However, according to the records of this case, it is recognized that the defendant suffered difficulties due to health problems and business difficulties at the time, but does not seem to fall under a sudden and inevitable case to the extent that it would correspond to natural disasters and accidents. Thus, the above assertion is rejected.