beta
Text
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who served as the president of the school juristic person D from September 11, 2013, employs approximately 17 full-time workers and operates a F graduate School University affiliated with the foregoing school juristic person E in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.
(a) For wages of 2014 high group 2194, the full amount shall be paid at least once a month on a fixed date;
Nevertheless, the Defendant Company did not pay KRW 4,457,120 on September 25, 2013, the date of regular wage payment, as well as the attached Form, to a person who has worked in the above University from September 1, 2012 to the present date, with the victim G’s wage of KRW 4,457,120 on September 25, 2013.
1. A total of 13 workers did not pay 160,897,060 won on every 25th day of the month when the regular payment was made, as shown in the list of crimes.
B. From September 1, 2012 to April 30, 2014, the Defendant breached his/her duty to liquidate money and valuables, as well as the victim G 14,496,50 won from January 1, 2014 to April 4, 2014 by a person who retired from work while working at the aforementioned university and retired from work.
2. A total of KRW 213,619,140 for the total nine workers, such as the sequence 3 to 11 of the crime sight table, did not pay 213,619,140 within 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement on the extension of the payment period between the parties.
(2) From September 1, 2011 to September 25, 201, the Defendant violated the duty of regular payment of wages, including the Defendant’s failure to pay KRW 6,631,460 on January 25, 201, as the date of regular payment, to pay KRW 6,631,460 on January 25, 201.
2. A total of KRW 69,373,210 for total two workers, such as Nos. 1 and 2 of the crime sight table, was not paid on the 25th day of each month during which the regular payment of wages was made.
2. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Article 109(1) of the Labor Standards Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent under Article 109(2) of the same Act. According to the certificate of non-existence of criminal punishment issued by the Defendant on January 25, 2016, the instant facts charged are as follows.