The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the C representative in Full-time Seoul Special Metropolitan City B, who employs 11 full-time workers and operates a sports entertainment business.

Where an employee retires, an employer shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days from the date on which the cause for such payment occurred.

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

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 5,864,650 of D's retirement pay that he/she retired from office from July 1, 2012 to February 28, 2015 within 14 days from the date of his/her retirement without an agreement on the extension of the payment deadline between the party concerned.

2. The judgment is a crime falling under Article 44 subparag. 1 or 9 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits, and it cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent pursuant to the proviso of Article 44 of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits. According to the records, it can be known that a worker D expressed his/her intent not to punish the Defendant on December 5, 2016, after the public prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.