beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2014.04.25 2013가단35313

퇴직금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 13, 200, the Plaintiff joined C operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) and served as a pressure-generating engineer. On October 3, 2008, the Plaintiff was hospitalized with the disposal chest, and did not work for the Defendant Company.

B. From May 25, 2010, the Plaintiff served again in the Defendant Company, but went back on March 31, 2013, and was paid a fixed amount of KRW 3.2 million per month during the above working period. The Plaintiff’s retirement pay during the above working period is KRW 9,135,341.

C. On March 31, 2013, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to pay retirement allowances, and the Defendant paid KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff on April 30, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 4, Eul evidence 1 to Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff asserts that, on March 13, 200, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff a retirement allowance of KRW 41,303,120 calculated according to the above continuous employment period, and damages for delay thereof, as the Plaintiff joined the Defendant Company and retired on March 31, 2013.

As to this, the defendant asserts to the purport that since the plaintiff retired from the defendant company on October 3, 2008, but re-employed on May 25, 2010 and the employment relationship was terminated during the above period, the plaintiff's claim for retirement allowance of this case based on the premise that the employment relationship was continued during the above period is unfair.

(2) The judgment of retirement allowance is an amount of money having the nature of the post-paid wage paid to an employee who has been employed for a certain period of time and has retired, and the specific claim for retirement allowance is a requirement that the employee is retired after the continuous work (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da19256, May 14, 196). Thus, the employer continues the period during which the employment relationship has not been discontinued.