logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.08.20 2015노34
근로자퇴직급여보장법위반
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding three hundred thousand won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant’s failure to pay a retirement allowance to E was due to the fact that the Defendant was not aware of the obligation to pay a retirement allowance, which is merely an error of law’s land or illegality without justifiable grounds.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant as to the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

2. Determination

A. The gist of the facts charged is that the Defendant is an employer who has employed ten workers in Jeju, who operated a Do Private Teaching Institute.

When a worker retires, the employer shall be liable to pay the retirement allowance within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred.

Nevertheless, the Defendant is working from July 20, 2008 to June 30, 201.

The retirement allowance of retired workers E was not paid 4,493,931 won after 14 days from the date of occurrence of the cause for payment without an agreement on the extension of the due date.

B. The lower court determined that: (a) there was no awareness that the Defendant, a worker, was able to receive a retirement allowance by retiring an instructor of the Plaintiff’s driving school (hereinafter “instant driving school”); and (b) as long as the Defendant demanded the Defendant to pay a retirement allowance after the lapse of two years from February 2, 2012 when the instant driving school was located, it cannot be readily concluded that the Defendant did not pay a retirement allowance to E; and (c) there was insufficient evidence to prove that the Defendant was guilty of violating the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits.

C. 1) First of all, we examine whether E can be seen as a worker of the instant private teaching institute. (A) Whether it constitutes a worker under the Labor Standards Act is an employment contract or a contract for employment, and in substance, the worker is in a subordinate relationship with the employer for the purpose of wages in the business or workplace.

arrow