logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.02.03 2017고정44
근로기준법위반등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is the defendant who runs a construction business as the representative of Daegu Dong-gu Section C (State) located B.

(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 in special circumstances, the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay the total of KRW 17,225,806 of wages in September 2014, 2014, the wage of KRW 3.5 million in November 2015, the wage of KRW 3.5 million in December 2015, the wage of KRW 3.5 million in January 2016, the wage of KRW 3.5 million in February 2016, and KRW 17,225,806 in March 3, 2016, within 14 days from the date of retirement.

(b) Where an employee retires, an employer shall pay a retirement allowance within 14 days after the cause for such payment occurred;

Provided, That in special circumstances, the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not pay KRW 5,775,51 of D's retirement pay within 14 days from the date of retirement as the Defendant retired from employment from July 3, 2014 to March 2, 2016.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are the crimes 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, which cannot be prosecuted against the employee’s explicit intent under Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act, and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act.

On January 5, 2017, after the institution of the instant prosecution, workers D may recognize the fact that he/she expressed his/her intention not to be punished against the Defendant in this Court.

Therefore, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow