The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the C representative located in Tong Young-si, who ordinarily employs six workers and engages in active fish distribution business.

(a) An employer shall pay wages, compensations, and all other money or valuables within fourteen (14) days from the date of his retirement, when the cause for the payment of such wages, compensations, or other money or valuables occurred

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay the total amount of KRW 2,342,857, including KRW 1,700,000 in September 2016, and KRW 642,857 in October 10, 2016, when a cause for payment occurred without any agreement between the parties to the extension of the payment deadline, when the cause for payment occurred without any agreement between the parties to the extension of the payment deadline.

(b) An employer shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days from the date of retirement when the reason for payment of the retirement allowance occurred, if the employee retires;

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 3,097,199 of retirement allowances of retired workers D within 14 days from the date of retirement when the grounds for payment occurred without any agreement between the parties to the extension of the payment deadline, while taking charge of active selection and top-down duties from September 17, 2016 to October 21, 2016.

2. We examine the judgment, among the facts charged above. A. The crimes falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, which constitute the crimes under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, in accordance with Article 109(2) of the same Act:

B. Paragraph (1) is a crime falling under Article 44 subparagraph 1 or 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits, and cannot be prosecuted against each victim’s express intent pursuant to the proviso to Article 44 of the same Act. According to the records, the victimized worker wishes to punish the Defendant after the instant indictment was instituted.