A. On May 29, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for recognition of the fact of bankruptcy, etc. with the Defendant on May 29, 2015, for the payment of wages and retirement allowances (hereinafter referred to as “wages, etc.”) due to the default of payment by the Plaintiff Company B (hereinafter referred to as “instant workplace”).

B. On November 9, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision not to grant recognition on the ground that the Plaintiff does not constitute “the Plaintiff is unable to pay wages, etc. or significantly difficult to pay wages, etc.” (hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff, who is dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on February 4, 2016, but was dismissed on August 9, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

A. The parties' assertion

The plaintiff asserts that there is no possibility of paying the overdue wages within three months since the plaintiff is actually unable to perform his/her obligation as a result of his/her business as 7,705,157,610 won for the debt confirmed by the business establishment of this case, and that there is no possibility of paying the overdue wages within three months. The defendant asserts that the debt of the business establishment of this case is 6,858,550,990 won, and that there are several lands and above-ground buildings (hereinafter referred to as "real estate of this case," including a notice of the 1,696m of the city owned by the business establishment of this case, appraisal price of 5,76,918,00 won for the real estate of this case is 5,766,918,00 won for the total rent of 2,630,000 won for the real estate of this case to be leased to three business establishments, such as D, and that there is no possibility of paying the overdue rent of this case to the defendant through the civil procedure.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

Article 5 (1) 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Wage Claim Guarantee Act provides for the employer's ability to pay wages among the requirements for recognition of bankruptcy, etc. as follows:

3. The payment of wages, etc. shall be considerably difficult due to any cause falling under any of the following items:

In the interpretation of the above provision, if there is no ability to pay wages, etc. or even if there is such possibility, if the payment of wages, etc. is considerably difficult due to the reason under item (b), it shall be deemed that the employer

In full view of the statements and the purport of the evidence Nos. 1 through 12 of this case and the whole pleadings, it is acknowledged that the plaintiff had been conducting an auction procedure on May 29, 2015, when the plaintiff filed an application for recognition of bankruptcy, etc. with the defendant on May 29, 2015, which is the property of the business establishment of this case. Thus, even if the plaintiff filed an application for distribution after participating in the above auction procedure, it is practically impossible to receive dividends within 3 months from the date the plaintiff filed the application for recognition of bankruptcy, etc., and it is difficult for the plaintiff as an employee to know the existence of the proceeds of this case in the business establishment of this case. Thus, it is impossible to collect rents of this case within 3 months after taking the identification of the existence of the proceeds of this case and the civil procedure therefor. It cannot be concluded that the business owner's agent of this case stated that he will first pay wages of 20 million won per month and make it difficult to conclude that this does not present.

Even if the Plaintiff took a civil procedure promptly and without delay, it does not clearly state the circumstances that an employee could have been paid wages in arrears if he/she actively takes measures for preserving claims under the Wage Claim Guarantee Act and other relevant statutes. Thus, even if the employer is unable to pay wages or significantly difficult conditions due to an employee’s failure to take measures for preserving claims under the interpretation of the above provision, barring special circumstances that can be recognized as an anti-social act as a criminal act due to a public contest with the employer, etc., it shall not be deemed as grounds for rejection of recognition of bankruptcy, etc. without permission. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s failure to receive dividends in the auction procedure for the instant real estate or to take the realization procedure for the instant rent income is merely derived from the Plaintiff’s non-legal act, which is an employee, and is made under the anti-social intent such as a public invitation with the employer, etc., it shall not be deemed that at least three months have passed since the date of application for recognition of bankruptcy, etc. in realizing or recovering the employer’s property.

50,000 shall not interfere with such activities.

Therefore, the instant disposition against it is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the disposition of this case shall be revoked in an unlawful manner, and the claim of this case shall be accepted on the ground of its ground, and it shall be so decided as per Disposition.

A person shall be appointed.