Business owner who failed to pay trainer wages found not guilty on appeal... Law: “There is no intention.”

A business owner who was put on trial for failing to pay severance pay to his employees was found not guilty on appeal.

According to the legal community on the 10th, the Changwon District Court's 3-3 Criminal Division overturned the original trial ruling that sentenced A, a man in his 40s indicted for violating the Labor Standards Act, to a fine of 1 million won at the appeal trial in January and found him not guilty.

Mr. A was accused of failing to pay wages and severance pay to trainer B, who resigned from the gym he ran last year, within the due date.

During the trial, Mr. A argued that he was not an employee under the Labor Standards Act because he signed a freelance contract with Mr. B rather than an employment contract. Even if he was recognized as an employee, he denied intentionality, saying he was not aware of the obligation to pay because there was no precedent for paying severance pay to other trainers.

The first trial court sentenced Mr. A to a fine. The court ruled, “Mr. B has been regularly paid allowances and fixed wages while working at a specific time zone agreed upon with the defendant,” and concluded, “This is equivalent to providing work in a subordinate relationship for the purpose of receiving wages.”

Mr. A, who was dissatisfied with the result, immediately appealed. At the appeal trial, Mr. A asserted that Mr. B had committed embezzlement before leaving the company and owed him an amount of money. Therefore, during the settlement process, it was determined that there was no money to pay, but it was emphasized that there was no intention of non-payment.

The second trial court declared him not guilty. The appellate court said, "Mr. B left the company due to an unpleasant matter and wrote a confirmation of repayment in this regard. In this situation, we cannot rule out the possibility that the defendant misunderstood that he was not obligated to pay severance pay," and added, "At the time of writing the contract, there are no circumstances showing that Mr. B raised an objection to the statement, 'There is no severance pay settlement because he is not an employee,' or requested subscription to the four major insurance policies."

Attorney Cho Ik-cheon of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, explained, "If there are grounds to dispute the existence of the obligation to pay wages, etc., and there is a significant reason for non-payment, the intention to violate the Labor Standards Act cannot be recognized." He added, "Given the specific contractual relationship between the two and the circumstances at the time of his resignation, Mr.

Reporter Kwon Byeong-seok (bsk730@fnnews.com)

[View full article]
Business owner who failed to pay trainer wages found not guilty on appeal... Law “Not intentional” (Shortcut)