beta
Text
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The Defendant is operating a wholesale company of building materials using nine full-time workers under the name of “(D)C” of the fifth floor of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Building 2. A.
The Defendant who was employed by the said company from April 9, 2012 to October 21, 2012, and was retired from office, did not pay KRW 6,195,149 as the total amount of wages of KRW 363,739,739, July 2012, the amount of wages of KRW 1,742,90, August 2012, the amount of wages of KRW 1,356,220, and the amount of wages of KRW 6,195,149 within 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement on the extension of the payment period between the parties.
In addition, the Defendant did not pay the total amount of KRW 76,079,072 for 5 workers, as shown in the attached list of crimes, within 14 days from the date of retirement, without agreement on extension of the payment period between the parties concerned.
B. The Defendant not paid retirement allowances did not pay KRW 11,052,423 of retirement allowances to E retired workers after having worked in the company from September 1, 2010 to September 25, 2012 within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement on the extension of the payment period.
In addition, the Defendant did not pay the total amount of KRW 31,672,665 to three workers within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement on extension of the payment period between the parties.
2. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act.
According to the records, the victims can recognize the fact that they expressed their intention not to punish the defendant after instituting the prosecution of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.