beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 6,130,080 as well as its full payment from June 15, 2014.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On May 1, 2012, the Defendant was a person who was operating a Cvalescent Hospital, and the Plaintiff entered into an employment contract with the Defendant and provided labor until May 31, 2014.
B. Unpaid wages that the Plaintiff is obligated to receive are KRW 795,220 for April 201, 201, KRW 795,220 for May 2014, KRW 795,220 for annual allowances, KRW 878,100 for annual allowances, and unpaid retirement allowances are KRW 3,661,540 for unpaid retirement allowances.
C. On July 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking payment of the unpaid wages and retirement allowances totaling KRW 6,130,080 (= KRW 795,220 KRW 795,220 KRW 795,220 KRW 878,661,540) and damages for delay from June 15, 2014. On July 29, 2014, the said court decided to recommend performance to pay the Defendant the amount of the above claim and became final and conclusive on August 14, 2014.
[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of 6,130,080 won of unpaid wages and retirement allowances, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from June 15, 2014 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the expiration of 14 days from the date of retirement.
[Plaintiff has already secured an effective executive title "a final and conclusive decision on performance recommendation" with respect to the same subject matter of lawsuit as in the instant lawsuit. However, the final and conclusive decision on performance recommendation recognizes incidental effects such as executory power and legal requisite effects, excluding res judicata, among the effects of a final and conclusive judgment, and it does not recognize res judicata (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da34190, May 14, 2009; Supreme Court Decision 2006Da34190, etc.; Supreme Court Decision 2006Da34190, May 14, 2009). In that a final and conclusive judgment received, a person who has received a decision on performance recommendation does not readily deny the benefit of lawsuit in filing a new suit in order to