The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, along with B (Suspension of Prosecution), is a joint representative of the company called “D” in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si C, who employs five full-time workers and operates trade business.

The Defendant, at the Chinese branch of the foregoing company around June 29, 2013, had not paid KRW 3,749,730 in total, KRW 315,780 in annual leave allowances and retirement allowances and KRW 1,44,60 in total, KRW 3,730 in the date of retirement within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement on the extension of the payment date between the parties, for retired workers E, from around February 10, 2012.

2. In light of the judgment, the above facts charged are those falling under Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 44 Subparag. 1 and 9 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act, and Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, and Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent.

However, according to the letter of withdrawal of complaint received by the court, it can be recognized that the above worker withdraws his/her wish to punish the defendant after the indictment of this case was instituted. Thus, the indictment of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act