beta
Text
All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.
Reasons
The defendant in the factory room is a user who conducts manufacturing as a C representative in the second floor in Jeju-si.
1. When a worker dies or retires, the employer in violation of the Labor Standards Act shall pay the worker wages, compensations, and other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;
The Defendant had worked from June 27, 2015 to November 4, 2018, and had not paid the total of KRW 26,50,000 from August 27, 2016 to October 2018 of D (the age of 43) who retired from the said place of business within 14 days from the date of retirement.
2. An employer who violates the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act shall, in case where a worker retires, pay the retirement allowance within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred; and
The Defendant, while working from June 27, 2015 to November 4, 2018, did not pay KRW 9,879,837 of the retirement allowance of D (year 43) that retired from the said place of business within 14 days from the date of retirement.
However, Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the former Labor Standards Act (amended by Act No. 16270, Jan. 15, 2019) are crimes falling under the main sentence of Article 109(1) and Article 36 of the same Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent under Article 109(2) of the same Act. Paragraph (2) of the above facts charged is a crime falling under the main sentence of Article 44 subparag. 1 and Article 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the proviso of Article 44 of the same Act. According to the documents submitted by the defendant to this court as of March 3, 2020, according to the defense counsel’s written opinion submitted by the defendant to this court as of February 3, 2020, the victim’s express express expression that he/she would not want to be punished against the defendant. Thus, all of the prosecution of this case is dismissed under Article 327 subparag.
It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.