The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecution against the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act against Workers B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I among the facts charged in the instant case. The lower court convicted the remainder of the facts charged, and only the Defendant filed an appeal against the conviction portion. Since the part dismissing the prosecution by both the Defendant and the Prosecutor was not dismissed, the part dismissing the prosecution in the instant case becomes final and conclusive, the scope of the judgment of the lower court is limited to the convicted portion of the lower judgment.

2. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable, which is the gist of the grounds for appeal.

3. The fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflected his mistake, and that the defendant seems to have made considerable efforts to resolve the issue of unpaid wages and retirement allowances by resolving a large number of wages in arrears and retirement allowances (including the part dismissed in the judgment below) that were entered as in the instant case, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the total amount of unpaid benefits and retirement allowances exceeds 129 million won, and many victimized workers are suffering, wage and retirement allowances are directly connected to their livelihood, and the damaged workers are expected to suffer considerable economic damage and mental suffering due to their non-payment of wages, etc., and the defendant has been punished four times due to the same crime, which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition to the above circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, consequence, etc., the records of the instant case, including the circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's improper argument in sentencing is rejected.

4. Conclusion.