Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a actual representative of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E located in the D and 1st floor, who runs a construction business using two full-time workers.

When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and other money or valuables within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred.

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay the sum of KRW 1,650,00,000 for the portion of wages of September 27, 2016, and KRW 3,300,000 for the portion of wages of October 2016 at the same place of business from May 25, 2016 to October 27, 2016 at the same place of business, within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the cause for payment between the parties, without agreement on the extension of the date of payment between the parties.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of the transaction details of passbook and the statutes governing the Stockholm content;

1. Article 109 of the relevant Act concerning criminal facts, Articles 109 (1) and 36 of the Standards for Optional Labor, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The part dismissing a public prosecution under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the order of provisional payment

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant did not pay KRW 219,980 of the C’s wages on April 6, 2017, which he/she worked in the said workplace from April 6, 2017 to April 19, 2017, within 14 days from the date of his/her retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the cause for payment, without an agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment period.

2. That the violation of the Labor Standards Act due to the payment of wages cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent (Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act), and as a written withdrawal of a complaint stating the intent of B/C not wanting to punish the defendant, this part of the indictment is dismissed in accordance with Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.