임금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence No. 1, the original defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a total of KRW 40 million from January 26, 2007 to October 2007 in installments for 10 months. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the above KRW 40 million and delay damages, barring any special circumstances.
As to this, the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription is the case, and the extinctive prescription of wage claims is three years in accordance with Article 49 of the Labor Standards Act, and it is clear that the extinctive prescription of three years has already expired before February 8, 2019, which is the date on which the plaintiff's application for payment order was filed by October 2007.
(A) The extinctive prescription defense of the Defendant has been completed 10 years from October 30, 2007, which is the final due date, even if the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim was selected as the agreed amount. Therefore, the Defendant’s aforementioned extinctive prescription defense is justified.
However, according to Article 174 of the Civil Act, the plaintiff's demand for the payment of the above amount continuously to the defendant. However, the plaintiff's demand for the repayment of obligation does not have the effect of interrupting prescription unless the claimant's demand for a judicial action, seizure, provisional seizure, provisional disposition, etc. is made within six months. Thus, the plaintiff's demand for re-claim
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.