임금
1. The defendant,
A. The phrase “personal amount” of the unpaid remuneration to Plaintiffs 1 through 22 as stated in the separate sheet and each of the said money.
1. The judgment on the cause of the claim is that the Defendant operated Jeju Industrial Information University and Search University and operated Jeju International University integrated from July 1, 201 to July 29, 201 by the decision of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology approving the establishment and abolition thereof on July 29, 201. The Plaintiffs are employees employed by the Defendant, and the Plaintiffs were not paid part of the wages from the Defendant during the period from April 2, 201 to February 2014, and the amount is the same as the “amount claimed” stated in the attached Form “amount claimed” as stated in the “amount claimed” column for unpaid remuneration, or it can be recognized in full view of the following facts: (a) there is no dispute between the parties concerned; or (b) evidence under subparagraphs 1 through 6, 1, and 2, and evidence under subparagraphs 1 through 3 (including each number) and the purport of all pleadings under subparagraphs B-1
According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiffs the money stated in the "amount claimed" column for unpaid fees and damages for delay on each of the above amounts, unless there are special circumstances.
2. The Defendant’s assertion asserts that the Defendant paid income tax and local income tax on January 1, 2014, which Plaintiff 1 and 22 ought to be paid on or around January 2015, and that the unpaid remuneration should be deducted from the unpaid remuneration, and that the remaining amount is the same as the entry in the “personal fee” column of the unpaid remuneration.
In full view of the following facts: (a) No. 4-1, (b) No. 5-1, (c) 5-1 through 3, and (d) 6-1 of the evidence No. 6-1, and (c) the entire purport of the arguments and arguments, the Defendant paid the income tax and local income tax on January 2, 2015 on behalf of Plaintiff 1 through 22-1, and the amount is recognized as identical to the statement in the column for “the amount of the invoice for deduction” of the unpaid remuneration attached hereto; (b) therefore, it is clear that the amount remaining after deducting the amount is identical to the statement in the column for “amount of the invoice for deduction” of the unpaid remuneration attached hereto is identical to the statement in the column for “amount of the unpaid remuneration.”
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion.