임금
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff entered into an employment contract with C and served from April 15, 2013 to January 28, 2014 (i.e., total unpaid wages of KRW 579,800 - substitute payment of KRW 3 million). As such, the Plaintiff did not receive wages of KRW 2,979,800 (i.e., total unpaid wages of KRW 5,979,800). As such, the Plaintiff has a claim against C for 2,979,800 and its delay damages against the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendant, established by C by abusing the company’s system for the purpose of evading its obligation, cannot be asserted that the Defendant had a legal personality separate
Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the unpaid wages of KRW 2,979,800 and damages for delay.
2. Determination
A. If an existing company established a new company with substantially the same form and content as that of the existing company in order to evade debts, this constitutes abuse of corporate system, and thus, in such a case, creditors of the existing company may claim for the performance of debts to the new company. However, whether a new company was established with the intent to evade debts of the existing company should be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, including the management status or asset status at the time of closure of the existing company, the time of establishment of the new company, the existence and degree of assets useful for the new company to be a new company, the existence of assets transferred from the existing company to the new company, and whether reasonable prices have been paid if
(See Supreme Court Decision 2014Da89324 Decided April 23, 2015, etc.). B.
According to each description of the health belt, Gap 2, 3, and 5 (including each number), the defendant's trade name added only the "S" to the trade name of "C" and the defendant and C are using the same symbol. The location of the principal office of "C" is the same as that of the defendant's principal office (Seoul Guro-gu, 704) from January 5, 2015 to February 9, 2012. It did not register cancellation even after the closure of business by "C" around September 2015.