2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. The Defendant was notified on April 13, 2018 of the summary order of a fine due to a violation of the Labor Standards Act due to the payment of wages and became final and conclusive on April 27, 2018.

(Seyang District Court 2018 High Court 683).b.

The criminal facts of the above summary order are as follows: The defendant is a personal business operator and employer who performed stone construction works at the site of new construction of housing located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C, from July 1, 2016 to the same year.

8. Until July 24, 2016, the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 2.1 million for July 2016, and KRW 900,000 for August of the same year, who worked as building stones at the construction site above, did not pay KRW 3 million.

‘' is the same.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1-3 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. In a civil trial on the assertion and judgment, even if it is not bound by the finding of facts in a criminal trial, the facts found guilty of the same facts are valuable evidence. Thus, it cannot be recognized that the facts opposed to the finding of facts in a criminal trial are difficult to adopt a factual judgment in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial (Supreme Court Decision 92Da31453 delivered on January 15, 1993). According to the above facts, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum as provided by the Labor Standards Act from September 8, 2016 to the date of full payment after 14 days from the plaintiff's retirement date to September 8, 2016.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserts that since the Plaintiff, who was not the Defendant individual, was employed by the Defendant Company D as the representative director, the wage payment liability is against D, and since the completion of the above site was completed on July 10, 2016, the wage amount cannot be recognized until August 24, 2016 alleged by the Plaintiff. However, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is difficult to employ the criminal facts acknowledged in the above summary order.