The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant, as the representative of C in Namyang-si, is an employer who operates a valve pipe manufacturing business using five regular workers. A.

Defendant in violation of the Labor Standards Act is working for the above company on July 17, 1992.

The sum of D’s wage of 660,000 won in November 2017, and the wage of 2,860,000,000 in December 2017, and that of 2,860,000 won in employment on February 10, 1994, which were retired on December 31, 2017.

On December 31, 2017, E’s retirement 620,000 won of the wage in November 2017, and 2,700,000 won of the wage in December 2017, and 2,700,000 won in total, were not paid within 14 days from the date of occurrence of each cause for the payment, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

B. The Defendant violated the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits did not pay KRW 57,945,660 of the retirement allowances of the aforementioned D, and KRW 51,538,310 of the retirement allowances of the above E, within 14 days from the date of occurrence of the relevant cause for payment, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of payment.

2. Public prosecution may not be instituted against the explicit will of the victimized worker under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act.

However, according to the agreement received by this court on December 24, 2018, since it is apparent that damaged workers D and E have withdrawn their wish to punish the defendant after the prosecution of this case, the prosecution against the violation of each of the Labor Standards Act and the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act constitutes the case where the injured workers expressed their wish not to prosecute a case which cannot be prosecuted against the clearly expressed intention of the victimized workers, or where the declaration of wish to punish the case is withdrawn.

Therefore, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.