logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.27 2015노2807
근로기준법위반등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Of the facts charged against Defendant B, the lower court dismissed the public prosecution on the grounds that the victim had expressed his/her intent not to be punished against Defendant B after instituting a public prosecution against the violation of the Labor Standards Act on the grounds of worker I’s non-payment of wages. The lower court convicted Defendant B of the remainder of the facts charged against Defendant B and the whole facts charged against Defendant A.

However, since a prosecutor and Defendant B did not appeal the dismissal part, and the above part is separated and confirmed as it is, only the above guilty part belongs to the scope of the judgment of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts (1) In relation to the part on violation of the Labor Standards Act (2012 highestest 5559) among the facts charged against Defendant A, Defendant A transferred all the management rights of the instant age club to Defendant B on November 24, 2010 and completely left the management. As such, Defendant A is not obliged to pay wages to the workers indicated in the facts charged, and there is no perception and intention to pay wages.

② Of the facts charged against Defendant A, there is a fact that the Defendant received money from the victims as stated in the facts charged.

However, in the case of the victim Q Q, the victim transferred the shares according to the agreement and repaid most of the borrowed funds.

In the case of victims R, tobacco sales in the age club was practically possible, and only the location of the store was changed.

In the case of U, the victim was invested in the state where he was well aware of the overall management conditions of the instant age club, and thereafter, at the time of transferring the right to manage the said age club, Defendant B acquired the above victim’s obligation to borrow money, and Defendant B did not perform this obligation.

Therefore, Defendant A’s deception and act of deception.

arrow