On June 1, 2005, the Plaintiff was employed on D on April 1, 2007 by each of the Defendant’s personal employees on July 5, 2010. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 22103, Sep. 14, 2009>

On August 1, 2011, the Plaintiff retired from F on September 1, 2011, respectively.

On December 20, 2012, the Defendant established G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and assumed office as the representative director. On December 28, 2012, around that time, the Defendant deposited KRW 19,049,261 in D’s account and KRW 27,34,801 in E’s account as retirement allowance, but recovered all the above money on the same day. From the year 2013, the Defendant handled the business of withholding wage and salary income in the name of Nonparty Company.

D on July 15, 2013, E withdrawn respectively from May 1, 2013.

On May 27, 2015, in the case of violation of the Act on Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits, Seoul Southern District Court 2015 Go-Ma27, the Defendant was convicted of the Defendant on the grounds that the payment of retirement allowance was not made within 14 days from the date of each retirement without agreement on extension of the due date, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter “Related Cases” (hereinafter referred to as “Related Cases”). According to the fact that there is no dispute, each entry of Gap 1, 15, 16, 19, 20, and Eul 1 evidence (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings, and the fact of the recognition as above, as to the plaintiff’s claim for judgment as to the claim of Eul, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff an unpaid retirement allowance of KRW 24,142,941, and KRW 15,572,840 as well as the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from July 30, 2013 to the date of full payment.

The defendant's assertion on the defendant's assertion has entered into an annual salary contract with the plaintiff, etc. and has paid the amount of 12 higher retirement allowances as well as the amount of 12 higher retirement allowances.

The plaintiff in 2006.