logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.07.17 2013고단738
무고방조등
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and by imprisonment for six months.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Judgment of the court below]

1. The Defendant, who committed the crime of unscambing and aiding by Defendant A, operated Company D, which is a mobile phone agent from March 2, 2010 to February 201, and closed down around February 2011, and took the responsibility-based investors, and, on March 3, 2011, the Defendant was unable to receive wages even if he/she worked in the Fran shop located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, on the ground that he/she was unable to receive wages from B and B, and received substitute payments under the Wage Claim Guarantee Act by filing a false petition and complaint, and received a request for the Defendant to use the remainder money.

Accordingly, the Defendant assisted and abetted the Defendant, such as B, by facilitating the commission of the crime, by making it easier for B, etc. to commit the crime, where B, etc., while serving as a worker of D and not receiving wages, in order to assist B, etc. in submitting a false statement and written complaint as if they were employed as a worker of D and not receiving wages, even though B, etc. did not work as a worker of D, Gangnam-gu 1024, Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 1024.

2. Defendant B’s crime

A. The Defendant, as described in the above paragraphs (1) and (3) of this Article, filed a petition with the above A on the grounds of delayed payment of wages, and received substitute payment under the Wage Claim Guarantee Act, and paid the fine to be caused as a violation of the Labor Standards Act, and used the remaining money.

around April 25, 2011, the Defendant had no record of working in the Seoul Gangseo-dong 1024 public service center of the Seoul Gangnam Employment and Labor Office, and in fact, from May 201 to May 201, the Defendant had no record of working in D.

arrow