beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the fact that the defendant, in order to pay D's retirement benefits, has been in contact for several months after retirement, and that D has agreed to reduce the retirement benefits immediately after retirement as KRW 20 million, and even though D has agreed to do so, the defendant asserts that the amount of retirement allowances is KRW 32,056,160, which is the statutory retirement allowances, and that there is no intention to violate the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits, since there is no dispute over the scope of the obligation to pay retirement allowances to D, the defendant has not yet been paid.
B. The lower court’s sentencing of an unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. If there is a ground for dispute over the existence and scope of the obligation to pay retirement allowances as to the assertion of mistake, it shall be deemed that there is a reasonable reason that the employer has not paid the relevant retirement allowances. Thus, it shall be difficult to find that the employer had the intent to commit a crime under Articles 44 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act. Whether there is a ground for dispute as to the existence and scope of the obligation to pay retirement allowances should be determined in light of the reasons for refusal of payment, the grounds for such obligation, the organization and size of the company operated by the employer, various matters such as the purpose of the business, and other various circumstances at the time of dispute as to the existence and scope of the obligation to pay retirement allowances, and it shall not be concluded that the employer has the intention to commit a crime under Articles 44 and 9
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do8248, Oct. 13, 2011). According to the foregoing legal doctrine, the health care unit returned to the instant case, and the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the Defendant also recognized that the statutory retirement allowances of D are KRW 32,056,160, and that the Defendant is obligated to pay the said allowances, and the Defendant is subject to D.