beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.12.17 2019나70782

퇴직금

Text

1. The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. The plaintiff and the defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a company that engages in debt collection, credit investigation, etc. with permission from the Financial Services Commission in accordance with the Use and Protection of Credit Information Act (hereinafter “Credit Information Act”).

B. The Defendant has 8 departments, such as the card bond register, bank bond register, credit investigation department, marketing promotion department, communication bond register, prediction bond register, camping Co-claim register, AMF business department, and 9 points in each region (in Busan, Daegu, Incheon, Gwangju, Daejeon, Suwon, Mannam, Mayang, Manyang, Manyang).

C. Around December 1, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a delegation agreement with the Defendant, and performed claims management and claims collection business from the said J bank claims division until July 31, 2018.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-6, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 4-7, Eul evidence 6-7, Eul evidence 17, Eul evidence 17, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion

A. Although the Plaintiff entered into a delegation contract formally with the Defendant, the Plaintiff is a worker under the Labor Standards Act, as it actually provided labor as subordinate to the Defendant, such as being subject to considerable direction and supervision from the Defendant in performing its duties.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay retirement allowances to the plaintiff under the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act.

B. The Plaintiff is an independent business operator who has entered into a delegation contract with the Defendant on an equal footing, and is engaged in one’s own business, and does not constitute a worker under the Defendant’s command and supervision for the purpose of wages.

3. Determination - Whether the Plaintiff constitutes a worker under the Labor Standards Act

A. Whether a person is a worker under the relevant legal doctrine ought to be determined in accordance with whether a contract form is an employment contract or a delegation contract, and whether a labor provider provided labor to an employer for the purpose of wages at a workplace.