임금
1. The part of the heavy damage for delay in exchange at the trial shall be dismissed;
2.In exchange for the purpose of exchange at the trial.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. From April 1, 2012 to August 31, 2012, the Plaintiff was unable to receive remuneration while working for a well-dying corporation that operates agricultural and fishery products processing and manufacturing business, etc.
B. On September 18, 2012, a well-dying Pream Co., Ltd., the Plaintiff.
The agreement was made to pay 13,000,000 won (i.e., remuneration of KRW 3,000,000 per month x 5 months) remaining after deducting KRW 2,00,000 already paid from the service period specified in paragraph (i.e., month x 5 months) until October 30, 2012 (hereinafter “instant agreement”).
C. On December 24, 2014, rehabilitation procedures commenced for the well-dying Pream Co., Ltd., and the Plaintiff reported KRW 9,504,000 out of the instant agreed amount as rehabilitation claims within the claim inspection period for the said rehabilitation procedures, but the Defendant denied all of them.
Within one month from the last day of the said investigation period, the Plaintiff filed an application to resume the proceedings in the instant lawsuit.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 4 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Every rehabilitation creditor who determines whether a lawsuit seeking confirmation of rehabilitation claims for damages for delay is lawful shall report his/her name and address, the details and cause of each claim, the amount of voting rights, etc. to the court within the reporting period set by the court.
(Article 148 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act). The subject matter of the lawsuit for confirmation of rehabilitation claims is limited to the matters entered in the table of rehabilitation creditors after having been reported as rehabilitation claims (Article 173 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act), and it is unlawful to seek the confirmation of unreported rehabilitation claims.
According to the aforementioned evidence, it is unlawful to seek the confirmation of damages for delay on the claim, since the Plaintiff filed a report with the rehabilitation court only on the principal amount of the instant claim KRW 9,504,00,00, and the damages for delay is not reported and the damages for delay is not recorded in the table
3. Determination as to the cause of the claim.