A. The Plaintiffs were employed by E operating the beauty art room of the trade name “D” (hereinafter “the beauty art room of this case”), and Plaintiff A provided labor to, and retired from, the service of, the respective beauty artists (Hodner) from November 20, 206 to July 31, 2013, and Plaintiff B from September 1, 2010 to July 31, 2013.

B. The Plaintiffs were not paid retirement allowances from E at the time of their retirement, and the amount of retirement allowances calculated on the basis of the average wage during the above service period, and the amount of retirement allowances calculated on the basis of the Plaintiff A shall be 35,66,673 (average wage) 】 30 days 】 [2,446 days (work period) ± 365 days, and less than KRW 365, and hereinafter the same shall apply.

[] The plaintiff B is 10,458,222 won =19,475 won (average wage) ¡¿ 30 days 】 [1,065 days (work period) ± 365 days].

C. The Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against E in relation to the payment of retirement allowances (Seoul Southern District Court 2013Kadan67970). On January 22, 2014, the Plaintiffs rendered a judgment that “E shall pay to Plaintiff A 35,660,673 won, and 10,458,222 won and each of the said money to Plaintiff B at the rate of 20% per annum from August 15, 2013 to the date of full payment.”

On December 29, 2014, E filed a subsequent appeal by Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2014Na12923 on December 29, 2014, but the judgment dismissing the appeal on October 29, 2015 became final and conclusive around that time.

The Plaintiffs, in the case of voluntary auction of real estate C with respect to real estate owned by E, demanded a distribution based on a preferential right to claim a retirement allowance (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”), but did not receive a distribution (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”), and on February 12, 2015, as a holder of a right to deliver dividends of KRW 1,945,179 in the order of six order as of the date of distribution on the date of distribution, each of the Plaintiffs appealed to KRW 32,401,695 out of the amount of dividends of Defendant Sungsung Industry Co., Ltd., which was distributed in five order as a mortgagee.

[Grounds for recognition] No dispute exists, Gap-5, 19, and 20 each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination

A. The scope of plaintiffs' right to repayment is recognized as the top priority.