A. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is based on the first instance court's reasoning.

Since it is the same as the statement in the claim, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. 1) The claimant asserts that the plaintiff delayed payment of wages of KRW 8,855,90. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff did not have any delayed payment of wages of KRW 8,855,990, since the plaintiff received management expenses from the occupants in cash or received them in cash, and the plaintiff was paid all by using the plaintiff's benefits from the management expenses, the plaintiff did not have any delayed payment of wages. 2) The fact that the court found the defendant guilty of the same facts in a civil trial, even if not bound by the fact-finding in a criminal trial, shall be a flexible evidence, and the fact that the court found the defendant guilty of the same facts, in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial, shall not

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da31453 Decided January 15, 1993, etc.). The defendant's former representative C was convicted of the crime that the plaintiff did not pay the plaintiff a total of KRW 8,85,90 from May 2012 to September 2012, 2012, and the amount of wages and advance notice of dismissal allowances, and the fact that he received a final judgment of conviction is not sufficient to recognize that the plaintiff had already received all wages on the basis of the facts acknowledged in the criminal judgment as above, and there is no other evidence to support this. The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay interest in arrears from October 15, 2012, which the plaintiff seeks, since 14 days after the plaintiff's retirement date, to the plaintiff as well as 8,85,90 won and its 14 days after the plaintiff's retirement date.

C. The Plaintiff asserts that the interest in arrears should be determined.