logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.04.02 2015고정111
근로기준법위반등
Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the representative director of Ansan-si, a member-gu, and has been operating a manufacturing business by using 18 full-time workers. The defendant did not pay the sum of F and G wage of KRW 1,835,000,000, in total from October 14, 2013 to May 30, 2014, within 14 days from the date on which the grounds for the payment occurred, without an agreement on extension of the payment deadline between the parties concerned.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement (C);

1. Application of the Extradition Report Act

1. Relevant Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act and the choice of fines for criminal facts;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Part concerning the dismissal of prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. The summary of the facts charged is the representative director of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. in Ansan-si, who is an employer who has operated a manufacturing business using 18 full-time workers. The defendant did not pay the C's wages of KRW 976,00,00,000, retirement allowances of KRW 3,156,610, and the total amount of KRW 6,456,610, and the above workplace of KRW 6,456,610, who worked in the above workplace from January 1, 2013 to June 16, 2014, and KRW 976,000, working in the above workplace from October 14, 2013 to May 30, 2014 without an agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment date.

2. We examine the judgment. Each of the facts charged is an offense falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act. According to the records of this case, B and C expressed their intent not to be subject to criminal punishment against the Defendant on March 24, 2015, after the institution of the instant prosecution.

arrow