A. Even if the original civil trial is not bound by the finding of facts in a criminal trial, the fact that a criminal judgment which became final and conclusive on the same factual basis is deemed as valuable evidence. Therefore, barring any special circumstance where it is deemed difficult to adopt a criminal judgment in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial, it cannot be acknowledged that the facts against the judgment are contrary to this, unless there are special circumstances to the contrary.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 89Meu6812, Aug. 14, 1990).

Based on these legal principles, the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with labor and retired from office from office during the period from February 15, 2005 to March 31, 2017, based on the overall purport of the statements and arguments in the instant case as follows: (a) from February 15, 2005 to March 31, 2017; (b) annual paid leave allowances of 2,343,327; (c) annual paid leave allowances of 2,343,327; (d) annual paid leave allowances of 2,466,60; and (e) annual paid leave allowances of 2,153,314; (d) annual paid leave allowances of 2,466,574 won; (e) the Defendant’s representative director C was convicted of a fine of 5 million won for the crime of failure to pay the Plaintiff’s paid the said paid retirement allowances (i.e., the Defendant’s retirement allowances of 2018; (e) the Defendant’s paid the unpaid retirement allowances of 2, 345184.75

The Plaintiff claimed for the payment of damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum from April 1, 2017 to April 14, 2017, the following day of retirement. However, with respect to the amount of wages and retirement allowances of the retiring, the damages for delay is added from the day after 14 days from the date of retirement pursuant to the Labor Standards Act and the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits. Thus,