beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.11.27 2015가단33294

임금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 4,954,174.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit.

Reasons

1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be found in Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-1, and Eul evidence 1-2 by integrating the whole purport of the pleadings.

From January 24, 2001, the Plaintiff served as an administrative employee, etc. at the affected hospital operated by the Defendant, a medical corporation, as a medical corporation, and retired on October 16, 2014.

B. However, at the time of the above retirement of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff did not receive 49,578,780 won in total, including retirement allowances, bonuses, wages, allowances, etc. (hereinafter “unpaid money and valuables”).

C. After that, from January 30, 2015 to August 31, 2015, the Defendant paid KRW 50,494,365 to the Plaintiff total sum of the stated amounts in the separate sheet repayment column.

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a total of 49,578,780 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum under Article 37(1) of the Labor Standards Act and Article 17 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act from October 31, 2014, past fourteen days after the date of the above retirement to the plaintiff. Meanwhile, there is no dispute between the parties that each of the above payments was appropriated first for the repayment of the unpaid original money at the time of the payment. In such a case, the defendant's total damages for delay for delay for unpaid money at the time of the above payment is KRW 5,869,759 as stated in the notice of delay damages on the attached Table. The defendant's final payment of KRW 7,770,845 won and the remainder of the unpaid money and valuables at the time of the payment to the plaintiff (=7,770,85,845 won, damages for delay).

3. As such, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as there is no ground.