logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2018.05.10 2018고정248
근로기준법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant, as the representative of the Lancheon-si Co., Ltd. (former E Co., Ltd.), is an employer who runs a building management business using 7 full-time workers at G located in the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F.

(a) When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and all 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 KRW 403,225 of the retired employee H in January 2015 within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment deadline.

(b) Where an employee retires, an employer shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days after 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 3,651,727 of the retired employee H’s retirement allowance to the management department from July 10, 2013 to January 5, 2015, within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties on the extension of the payment deadline.

2. The violation of the Labor Standards Act due to the payment of wages and the violation of the Act on Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits due to unpaid retirement allowances cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent (Articles 109(2) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, and Articles 44 subparag. 1 and 9 of the Workers’ Retirement Benefits Guarantee Act). Since the instant indictment was submitted to the court on April 30, 2018, which was the date of the instant indictment, a written statement stating the victim’s intention not to punish the victim’s H, the instant indictment was dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow