2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. Since the sum of basic pay, continuous service allowances, allowances for work on board, and bonuses paid by the Defendant during the period from July 2010 to July 2011 (in the case of Plaintiff S, until January 2011) falls short of the statutory minimum wage amount, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiffs each amount indicated in the “total amount of unpaid wages by individual” column of attached Table 1, corresponding to the difference, and damages for delay on each of the above amounts.

B. At the fifth day for pleading of the appeal, the Defendant stated that the Defendant withdrawn the part on whether the probation period was reduced by 10% among the grounds for appeal, and whether the comparable wage was included in the life-saving bonus and night work allowance, and only maintained the part on the monthly contractual work hours.

1) The Wage Agreement in 2011 (No. 3, Sept. 9, 2011) provides that working hours shall be 30 hours a week (less than one year of employment). The Defendant and the instant trade union agreed to apply the said Wage Agreement retroactively from July 1, 2010. As comparative wage is not the Wage Agreement in 2008, but the 130.42 hours per month (less than one year of employment: less than one year: 12.94 hours per month) pursuant to the Wage Agreement in 2011, the minimum wage should be calculated based on the amount of comparative wage paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs as the total amount of statutory minimum wage, and thus, this part of the Plaintiffs’ claim should be without merit, based on the minimum wage agreement in 208 (less than the minimum wage agreement in 20.208) other than the paid working hours in 201.