Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is an employer who has constructed a structural section in the construction site of a newly built multi-family house in the neighboring E-gu Seoul Metropolitan Area with 15 full-time workers under a subcontract from a new field comprehensive construction site.

When a worker dies or retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and all other money and valuables within fourteen 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 4,492,360 won of wages of six workers within 14 days from the date of retirement, as described in the attached Table Nos. 2, 3, 5, and 8, as stated in the attached Table Nos. 2, 3, and 5 through 8, as well as the F’s wage of October 1, 2012, working from September 15, 2012 to October 19, 2012.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on arrears;

1. As to the pertinent legal provisions on criminal facts and Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act (Selection of Fines) - The victim’s expression of intent not to punish or withdrawal of his previous wishing to punish a person, in order to recognize that the victim had expressed his wish not to punish a person, the victim’s true intent should be expressed in a way that is obvious and reliable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do1809, Jun. 15, 2001). In addition, it is insufficient to recognize that C’s statement in the court room alone withdrawn the victim’s wishing to punish a person.

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The summary of the dismissal of prosecution under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against victims C and D among the facts charged in the instant case is in violation of each of the Labor Standards Act, and the Defendant is at the construction site stated in the facts charged.