The defendant shall be innocent.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a business owner of the D Senior Citizens Medical Center located in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, who operates a social welfare facility business using 48 regular workers.

If any worker has violated this Act or Presidential Decree as prescribed in this Act at a business or workplace, he/she may notify the Minister of Employment and Labor or a labor inspector of such fact, and the employer shall not dismiss or take any disadvantageous measures against the worker on account of such notification.

Nevertheless, on March 28, 2014, the defendant filed a petition to the Central Local Employment and Labor Agency on the ground that four persons, including E, working as caregivers, were not paid wages such as expenses for improvement of treatment, extension allowances, etc.

2. In a judgment of conviction in a criminal trial, the conviction ought to be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to have a conviction that is beyond a reasonable doubt, to such a degree that the facts charged are true. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the degree that such conviction would lead to, the determination ought to be based on the defendant’s benefit even if there

(2) Article 104(1) and (2) of the Labor Standards Act provides that “In order to punish an employee on the ground that the employer’s unfavorable treatment violates Article 104(2) of the Labor Standards Act, the unfavorable treatment should be based on the employee’s supervisory body’s notification of the violation of the Labor Standards Act.” However, if there are other substantial grounds for the unfavorable treatment, it should not be punished for a violation of Article 104(2) of the Labor Standards Act.

Whether the employer's unfavorable treatment was based on the notification of the violation of the Labor Standards Act to the supervisory agency is the reason and time of the unfavorable treatment.