퇴직금 등
1. The defendant has the corresponding money stated in the "amount requested" column in the attached Table to the plaintiff (Appointeds) and the Appointeds.
1. The plaintiff (designated parties, hereinafter "the plaintiff, etc.") and the designated parties (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the plaintiff, etc.") are employed by the defendant who operates a business under the trade name of "C" and work for each business during the pertinent period and retired from office. The fact that the plaintiff, etc. did not receive money from the defendant as stated in the attached Table "amount of claim" among the wages for the above service period is not disputed between the parties, or that the plaintiff, etc. did not have any dispute between the parties, or that the plaintiff, etc. did not receive the money as stated in the attached Table "amount of claim" among the wages for the above service period from the defendant, may
According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff et al. wages equivalent to the corresponding amount stated in the "request amount" column of the attached Table to the plaintiff et al. and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum as stipulated in the Labor Standards Act from the corresponding date to the date of full payment on the day following the 14th day after the retirement date.
2. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant asserted that since the plaintiff et al. requested the payment cycle of retirement allowances, etc. including monthly pay, it cannot respond to the plaintiff et al.'s claim since it was included in monthly pay.
However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the existence of a retirement allowance installment agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, and the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the claim of this case by the plaintiff et al. is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.