1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs each amount of money stated in the claim (A) column of the claim amount sheet by the plaintiff and each of the above amounts.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence No. 1 (including additional numbers), the defendant is a stock company that runs meat and other processing and storage business, etc., and the plaintiffs were employed and worked for the defendant on May 1, 2014 through March 15, 2016, and all retired on April 30, 2017. The plaintiffs did not receive retirement allowances equivalent to the amount indicated in the claim amount column (A) in the claim amount table by the plaintiff from the defendant up to now.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiffs with retirement pay at the rate of 20% per annum of the Labor Standards Act from May 15, 2017 to the date of full payment with respect to each of the above amounts and each of the above amounts in the claim amount table (A) of the plaintiff's retirement pay to the plaintiffs.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. On May 1, 2014, the Defendant entered into the first processing boat, boat, and packing service contract with the cooperative on May 1, 2014, and had its employees provide the above services to the cooperative B from around that time to April 30, 2017. Since D operating C entered into a new service contract with the cooperative and made it possible for the Defendant to provide the same services as the Defendant, the Defendant and D entered into an employment succession contract with the content that included the Defendant’s exempted acceptance of the retirement allowance payment obligation against the Plaintiffs, the Defendant’s obligation to pay retirement allowances to the Plaintiffs is not nonexistent.

B. It is not sufficient to acknowledge that the employment succession contract was concluded between the defendant and D with the purport that D will accept the retirement allowance payment obligation against the plaintiffs as a discharge, solely on the basis of the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

In addition, even if there was an agreement to assume the obligation as alleged by the defendant, it is also possible.