1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From April 2001, the Plaintiff was in office as an auditor or a representative director, who is a registration officer of Company B (hereinafter “B”) from around April 201, and retired on September 26, 2012.

B. B was declared bankrupt on September 26, 2012 by the Incheon District Court 2012Hahap9, and the Defendant was appointed as the bankruptcy trustee B on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 (including a paper number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is an auditor or representative director, who is a registered director, B. However, the Plaintiff’s assertion is merely an employee under the direction and supervision of the net C, who is a major shareholder, for the purpose of wage.

Therefore, the plaintiff's retirement allowance and wage claim against B constitute estate claims, and the defendant is obligated to pay retirement allowances, wages, and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

3. We examine whether the instant lawsuit is lawful.

Claims for wages and retirement allowances of workers constitute estate claims (Article 473 subparag. 10 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act), and estate claims shall be repaid from time to time without resorting to bankruptcy procedures.

(Article 475 of the same Act). However, bankruptcy claims, other than estate claims, cannot be exercised without resorting to bankruptcy procedures (Article 424 of the same Act), and a lawsuit seeking a direct payment of bankruptcy claims against the bankrupt or bankruptcy trustee without going through bankruptcy procedures, is unlawful as there is no legal interest in the lawsuit.

With respect to whether the Plaintiff’s retirement allowance and wage claim constitute estate claims as a worker under the Labor Standards Act, whether it constitutes a worker subject to the Labor Standards Act or not, depending on whether the Plaintiff provided labor to the employer for the purpose of wages in substance regardless of the form of contract.