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

A. The Defendant is operating the Seo-gu Daejeon-gu 102, Seo-gu, Daejeon, that is “D” restaurant.

B. The Plaintiff, as employed by the Defendant, was in charge of delivery and neglect service at the above restaurant from June 18, 2012 to June 18, 2015.

C. From June 18, 2012 to June 17, 2013, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 2.1 million per month, from June 18, 2013 to June 17, 2014, KRW 2.1 million per month, from June 18, 2013 to June 17, 2014, KRW 2.2 million per month from June 18, 2014 to October 17, 2014, and KRW 2.3 million per month from October 18, 2014 to June 18, 2015.

Labor contracts entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant are defined as follows with respect to wages and working hours:

Benefits: It is confirmed that the monthly salary includes all statutory allowances, etc. for overtime work, such as overtime work, night work, holiday work, and holiday work, which are inevitably incurred within business hours in the characteristics of duties, and that the monthly salary is all determined.

Work hours: 12 hours a day/day a week;

E. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff a total of KRW 6 million as retirement allowance every one year after the Plaintiff’s working period expires.

In addition, on July 21, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a petition against the Defendant to the Daejeon Employment and Labor Office demanding the payment of overdue wages. On July 23, 2015, the Plaintiff received KRW 5 million from the Defendant and withdrawn the said petition.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 5, Eul's 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant asserts that, in the above petition case, the plaintiff was paid KRW 5 million from the defendant and the plaintiff did not raise any objection, such as additional claim for wages.

However, even though the plaintiff received five million won from the defendant in the above petition case and withdrawn the petition, there was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant on the addition of the evidence Nos. 2-1, 2, and 3.