The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact-finding facts, the Defendant, along with F (E), prepared and delivered a direct statement of non-performance that the Defendant may directly pay the employee’s unpaid wages to J (hereinafter “J”) as to the employee’s unpaid wages. As such, the Defendant extinguished the duty to pay wages to the said employee, the Defendant is not guilty.

B. Even if the Defendant was guilty of an unreasonable sentencing, the sentence (including a fine of four million won) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts: ① the defendant employed 9 workers, including G, at the site of Goyang-gu D apartment's corridor Construction Work, Go, Go, etc., which was being constructed after sub-subcontracted from J, and ordered work, and the defendant's assertion that he did not pay each of the wages to 6 workers of this case as stated in the facts charged is acknowledged; ② the defendant's assertion agreed to pay the wages to the worker of this case directly through the preparation of so-called so-called "written consent for non-employment" (No. 29 page of the investigation record), but the above "written consent for non-payment" is merely a document prepared by the defendant and the directly related party to the defendant, and it is difficult to recognize that the defendant agreed to pay all wages to the worker of this case regardless of the remainder of the original construction work; ③ The actual operator of J also received the above direct consent from the defendant, but the defendant could not be acknowledged as having agreed to protect the worker of this case.