The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant was unable to pay wages to workers because the Defendant was unable to receive the production contract amount from M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”), a production contract for the Defendant Company, and thus, the Defendant failed to perform his/her duty to pay wages.

It is difficult to see it.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the C’s actual manager in Kasung City B, who ordinarily employs 15 workers and operates the automobile parts manufacturing business.

1) When an employee dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and any other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred.

Provided, That the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

Nevertheless, the Defendant worked in the said workplace from March 17, 2014 to July 7, 2015, and did not pay the total of KRW 14,550,138 to four workers within 14 days from the date of retirement, as shown in the list of crimes attached to the lower judgment, as well as KRW 2,441,250 on May 1, 2015, to D, who retired workers, within the said workplace, without any agreement on the extension of the payment period between the parties.

2) When an employee retires, the employer shall pay the retirement allowance within 14 days after the date on which the cause for such payment occurred.

Provided, That the payment date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 2,962,832 to workers D, within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement on the extension of the payment period between the parties.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged based on the evidence in its judgment.

(c)

The court below held that the above deliberation was conducted.