2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The Defendants were the workers employed by the Plaintiff. After the establishment of E, the Plaintiff left the job from the Plaintiff Company E, and the Plaintiff was paid retirement allowances corresponding to the period of service at the Plaintiff Company, but did not receive retirement allowances from the Plaintiff, and received retirement allowances again from the Plaintiff.

Since the Defendants received retirement allowances from the Plaintiff and obtained profits without any legal ground and suffered losses to the Plaintiff, they are obligated to return the said money in unjust enrichment.

2. On January 15, 2016, the Plaintiff was present at the fourth date for pleading, and the Plaintiff and E’s comprehensive business transfer and takeover contract in the name of the Plaintiff and E were forged on the part of E, and the Plaintiff did not have concluded a contract to assume the obligation of retirement allowance payment to the Defendants between E and the Plaintiff.

If so, E paid the Defendants the amount equivalent to the Plaintiff’s retirement pay to the Defendants.

Even if there is no assertion or proof on the fact that E paid the Plaintiff’s obligation by subrogation, unless there is a good relationship with the Plaintiff, such as being subject to criminal punishment on account of the forgery of comprehensive business transfer under the Plaintiff’s name, and the takeover contract, and there is no reason to make the Plaintiff’s obligation on behalf of the Plaintiff), it does not take effect, but does not extinguish the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay retirement allowances to the Defendants (E is a comprehensive business transfer under the Plaintiff’s name, and even if it was followed by the Plaintiff’s business by forging a takeover contract, it does not take effect, apart from whether the Plaintiff may claim damages against E).