임금
All appeals filed by the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff against the principal claim and counterclaim are dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
In fact, on December 18, 2012, the Plaintiff was registered as the Defendant’s designer and was engaged in business activities.
The defendant's design director's provisions in the application for registration of designer prepared and submitted by the plaintiff to the defendant are as follows:
Article 5 (Prohibited Matters) (1) of the Regulations on Designers shall not engage in any of the following acts:
11. Holding business codes or business activities of another company of the same type of business. (2) In cases where a designer violates any prohibition prohibition under the above paragraph (1) or expresses his/her intention to establish only the business activities, the company shall dismiss the designer concerned, and shall not pay any remaining allowances including those resulting from the existing performance;
The main contents of the defendant's allowance regulations are as follows:
Supplementary to the Regulations on Allowances ( April 1, 2014)
2. The payment of allowances may be deferred at the time of the violation of the prohibition of design articles and suspected cases, and allowances for any name, such as the attendance allowance and protocol already paid, may also be recovered separately.
On November 4, 2014, the Plaintiff was registered as an intra-company director at the time of incorporation of C, a commercial union.
On March 31, 2015, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff as the Defendant’s designer on the ground that “the Plaintiff violated Article 5(1)11 of the Design Director Regulations by engaging in business activities of another company of the same type of business.”
The Defendant paid the Plaintiff’s allowance incurred during the pertinent month as of the end of the following month. On March 31, 2015, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff’s allowance of KRW 3,461,000 for February 2, 2015, and did not pay the Plaintiff’s allowance of KRW 3,124,000 for March 2015.
[Ground of recognition] The plaintiff did not dispute the following facts: Gap's evidence Nos. 3, 4, Eul's evidence Nos. 1, 3, 7, 10, and 11 (including additional numbers), and the whole purport of the pleading, and the ground for the plaintiff's claim as a whole. The plaintiff is the defendant before March 31, 2015, dismissed as the defendant's designer.