(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.03.28 2018고단7385

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.03.28 2018고단7385

근로자퇴직급여보장법위반등

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Criminal facts

The Defendant is a representative who actually operates the “D Hospital” in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and is an employer who engages in medical services using 70 full-time workers.

The Defendant, while working in the pertinent workplace from January 1, 2016 to July 31, 2017, did not pay the following wages and retirement allowances of KRW 10,374,925 as stated in the detailed statement of delayed payment, including KRW 7,00,000,00 for January 1, 2016, within 14 days from the date of his/her retirement, without any agreement on extension of the due date between the parties concerned.

7,00,000,000 of retirement pay for the month of January 2016 as of July 7, 2016; 7,000,374,925,000 as of February 7, 2016; 7,50,000,00 for August 2016; 7,00,00,00,00 for May 7, 200,00,00,00 for 6,000,00,000,000,00 for June 6, 200, 200,000 for June, 7, 200,00,000 for 6,00,000,000,000 for June 7, 2017, 000,000 for 0,006,07,000 for year of February 6, 200; 16,007

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning the F;

1. E’s written petition;

1. As to the defense counsel’s argument on the confirmation of delayed payment of wages, the calculation of retirement allowances, and the statement of wages, the defense counsel asserts that the defendant cannot be punished since the victim E expressed his/her intent not to have the defendant punished in relation to the instant case.

In criminal proceedings, the prosecutor seeking the punishment of the defendant is required to prove the criminal act of the defendant, and in relation to the crime that is required to meet special requirements for the prosecution of the relevant criminal act, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the existence of the relevant requirements for the prosecution. However, even if so, if there is a problem as to whether the victim's non-existence of punishment in the so-called crime of anti-competence, first of all, it is the existence of such non-existence of punishment in the defendant's assertion that there is such intention.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.03.28 2018고단7385

-서울북부지방법원 2020.02.13 2019고정729

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.26 2018가단5013335

-수원지방법원 2016.10.26 2015가단37579

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.20 2018가단5204506