1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant B’s KRW 20 million and as to this,

B. Defendant C is the same as Defendant B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The status of the party 1) Defendant Social Welfare Foundation C (hereinafter “Defendant Social Welfare Foundation”) was a social welfare foundation for the purpose of operating the integrated welfare center for the elderly and the comprehensive social welfare center, etc., and was entrusted by Seoul Special Si Community Welfare Center (hereinafter “instant welfare center”) from Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

2) On December 5, 2012, Defendant Corporation: (a) held a board of directors meeting on December 22, 2012 on the grounds that there was no applicant, and appointed Defendant B (son and E) as the director of the instant welfare center.

As of January 1, 2013, the Defendant Company entered into a labor contract with Defendant B (the Seoul Special Metropolitan City did not have entered into a labor contract or delegation contract with Defendant B) with no fixed term period from January 1, 2013 (the Seoul Special Metropolitan City did not have entered into a labor contract or delegation contract with Defendant B). 3) Defendant B, while working as the head of the instant welfare center, determined that the instant welfare center was registered with the National Tax Service in accordance with the operating regulations, organizational regulations, etc. enacted and implemented through the resolution of the board of directors of the Defendant Corporation, and that employees were employed and extended, and employees were converted to full-time workers.

4) The Plaintiff (n, F) served as a social welfare worker, and as a fixed-term worker from November 29, 2016 to August 31, 2017 at the first place of work, from the welfare center of this case to the welfare center of this case.

B. Defendant B’s forced indecent act against the Plaintiff was committed as the head of the instant welfare center, and Defendant B frequently demanded that Defendant B take a meeting at the latest time against the employee’s will or take an additional singing room after a meeting. The employee of the instant welfare center was able to write down the Plaintiff’s head on the spot of the instant meeting and rhing the Plaintiff’s head at the time of the meeting and rupbling the Plaintiff’s body, etc., even if the Plaintiff avoided.

In addition, Defendant B is an individual who is not related to the Plaintiff’s work by text message and telephone.