logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.07 2016나16282
임금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The text of the judgment of the court of first instance is set forth.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Korean Red Cross C Remodeling Corporation (Seoul Seodaemun-gu D) with the Korean Red Cross.

The defendant employed E as the site director for the execution of construction work.

B. E, as an agent of the Defendant’s on-site director, was to pay KRW 3.5 million per month on September 28, 2013, and employed the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff served until February 2014 and retired.

C. The Defendant’s representative director F was indicted on summary charge by the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014 High Court Decision 29608, on the ground that he did not pay the Plaintiff wages of KRW 10.5 million from December 2, 2013 to February 2014 (=3.5 million per month x three months).

Although the defendant representative F claimed formal trial, the court summoned the plaintiff, E, G, etc. as a witness, and judged that all the above facts constituting the crime were guilty.

Although the defendant representative director F appealed, the appeal was dismissed on November 26, 2015, and the judgment of the court of first instance became final and conclusive. D.

In the first instance, the Plaintiff was a person who received 3 million won out of the above accrued benefits, and reduced part of the amount as stated in the purport of the claim.

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid wages of KRW 7,500,000 ( KRW 10,500,000 - KRW 3,000), as sought by the Plaintiff, 20% per annum under the Labor Standards Act from July 15, 2014 to September 30, 2015, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff only worked until December 2013, and that there was a failure to report the deprivation of qualification for medical insurance, national pension, etc. from around January 2014, and that labor relations had been substantially terminated. The Plaintiff’s claim amount.

arrow