[퇴직금][집49(2)민,190;공2001.12.15.(144),2526]
Whether an employer’s setting-off of wage claims with the consent of the employee violates the main text of Article 42(1) of the Labor Standards Act, which provides the principle of total payment of wages (negative with qualification)
The purpose of the main text of Article 42(1) of the Labor Standards Act stipulating that "wages shall be paid in full to workers in currency," which declares the principle of full-time payment of wages is to protect workers by prohibiting an employer from unilaterally deducting wages from the total amount of wages so as not to threaten the economic life of workers by allowing them to be paid the full amount of wages. Therefore, an employer's unilateral offsetting of the employee's claim against the employee with the employer's claim against the employee is prohibited. However, in a case where an employer offsets the employee's claim against the employee's wage with the employee's consent, if reasonable grounds for recognizing that the consent is based on the employee's free will exist objectively, it shall not be in violation of the main sentence of Article 42(1) of the Labor Standards Act. However, in light of the purpose of the principle of full-time
Article 42(1) of the Labor Standards Act; Article 492 of the Civil Act
Plaintiff
Hansan Agricultural Cooperatives (Maximum attorney-at-law)
Ulsan District Court Decision 2000Na2863 delivered on March 29, 2001
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Ulsan District Court Panel Division.
1. On June 30, 1997, the court below acknowledged that retirement allowances paid out of the plaintiff's retirement from his retirement on the ground of 104,517,917, and that the defendant deposited the above money into the plaintiff's deposit account. In determining the defendant's defense that the plaintiff paid the total amount of retirement allowances from the above deposit, the court below rejected the decision of the court below that the plaintiff paid the above money to 5 million won, including the defendant's loan amount of 3 million won per head, in violation of the business regulations of the defendant union which set a loan limit of 1988 to 3 million won, while the plaintiff was working as the head of the office of the defendant union from 1991, the defendant union did not pay the above money to 34,718,615 won, including the above principal and interest of loans, etc., 197 to the defendant union, 34,718,615 won, which were paid out of 15,714,717
2. A. The purport of Article 42(1) of the Labor Standards Act stipulating that the main text of Article 42(1) of the Labor Standards Act provides that "the wages shall be paid in full to an employee in currency," thereby declaring the principle of full-time payment of wages is to protect an employee by unilaterally prohibiting the employee from unilaterally deducting wages by allowing him/her to pay the full amount of wages so as not to threaten his/her economic life. Therefore, it is prohibited that an employer unilaterally offsets the employee's claims with the employer's claims against the employee. However, in cases of offsetting the employee's claims with the employee's consent, if there exist reasonable grounds that the employer's consent is based on the employee's free will, the employer shall not be deemed to violate the main sentence of Article 42(1) of the Labor Standards Act. However, in light of the purpose of the principle of full-time payment of wages
B. However, in this case, the plaintiff argued that the employee of the defendant's association has forged the withdrawal slips and withdrawn the above 34,718,615 won (the plaintiff filed a complaint with the employees of the defendant's association for the crime of forging private documents, etc., which was detained by the plaintiff). On the contrary, the defendant argued that the defendant had withdrawn money including the above 34,718,615 won after obtaining the plaintiff's consent. Thus, the court below should have deliberated whether the consent of the plaintiff was valid if it is acknowledged that the defendant's consent was obtained, i.e., if the consent was obtained, whether the consent of the plaintiff was valid, or whether there was an objective reason that can be recognized as being based on the plaintiff's free will, i.e., the decision of the court below did not merely make a deliberation or consideration on that issue, and it did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to retirement allowances or in the misapprehension of legal principles as to retirement allowances for the defendant's use of the above 34,718,615 won.
3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition.
Justices Lee Ji-dam (Presiding Justice)