A. The Defendant leased a factory, equipment, etc. from AF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Non-Party Company”), and produced and processed and supplied a set of gold paper. The Plaintiffs were the employees of the Defendant from July 2016 to September 2017.

B. The Defendant did not pay the Plaintiffs wages and retirement allowances for August 2017 and September 2017. The sum is as indicated in the “amount claimed” column in the separate sheet.

C. Meanwhile, on September 22, 2017 and October 23, 2017, Nonparty Company paid to the Plaintiffs an amount equivalent to the “transfer amount of Plaintiff’s wage claim” stated in the separate sheet.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiffs the sum of the wages and retirement allowances for August and September of 2017, as stated in the “amount claimed” column in the separate sheet, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant asserted that the non-party company and the plaintiffs agreed to guarantee or concurrently take over the defendant's obligation to pay the wages to the plaintiffs, and accordingly, the non-party company paid part of the wages and retirement allowances to the plaintiffs in the position of guarantor or co-existence of debt. Thus, the defendant's obligation to pay the plaintiffs to the non-party company was partly extinguished due to the non-party company's repayment. Accordingly, the plaintiffs asserted that the plaintiff was merely lent money equivalent to each of the wages of this case from the non-party company for the purpose of maintaining the livelihood of the plaintiffs, and that even if the plaintiffs transferred the right to pay to the non-party company, it is invalid because it violates the principle of direct payment of wages, and thus the plaintiffs' wage and retirement allowance claim were not extinguished