임금
1. The judgment of the first instance, including a claim that has been reduced in the trial, shall be modified as follows:
The defendant.
1. Quotation of the first instance judgment
A. The reasons why the court should explain the cited part of this case are next to the judgment of the first instance.
The same shall apply to the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the judgment of the court of first instance is revised as stated in the following paragraph (2) is added.
It shall be quoted pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
B. 1) The part of the first instance judgment’s amendment 1) deleted the “selective welfare cost” of No. 2, 15, and entirely deleted the part corresponding to the “selective welfare cost” of the third part. 2) The part of the first instance judgment’s “Evidence Nos. 2, 4, and 10 (including additional numbers), 1, 2, and 3” as “Evidence No. 2, 4, 6, 7, 9 (including additional numbers), 1, and 3, as indicated in the fourth part of the first instance judgment.”
3) The deletion of the first to the sixth to the sixth Class 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance from the fifth 6th e to the sixth eth eth 9,14 of the sixth eth eth f., and the second e., "D.," and "Ma.," respectively. 4) The second eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth 6 of the judgment of the court of first eth eth eth eth 2
5) The third to fourth is deleted from the judgment of the court of first instance. 6) The third is as follows: (a) the third is as follows: (b) the third is as “B”; (c) the attached Form 2 of the same parallel is as “attached Form 2”; and (b) the last sentence of the same parallel is as “ May 23, 2019, which is the date the judgment is rendered,” and the defendant’s dispute as to the existence or scope of the obligation to perform is deemed reasonable.”
2. As examined in the above cited part of the judgment added, the key benefit of this case was regularly and uniformly paid, and the fixedness is also recognized as it was finally paid without the fulfillment of additional conditions when it provides labor.
The key benefit of this case constitutes ordinary wages, and the defendant's argument on the grounds for appeal against this is not accepted.
3. The plaintiffs' claims for conclusion are the scope of the above recognition.