1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs each corresponding amount and each corresponding amount stated in the "request amount for each plaintiff" as stated in the attached Form.

1. The parties' assertion

A. From among various supplementary benefits paid to the Plaintiffs, internal assessment pay, special area service allowance, technical allowance, special service allowance, fixed-term service allowance, duty allowance, regular bonus, and continuous service pay, despite the fact that all of the aforementioned supplementary benefits constitute ordinary wages, the Defendant paid overtime service allowance calculated by applying only the basic monthly salary, excluding the above additional benefits, as ordinary wages.

Therefore, the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiffs the corresponding amount stated in the “request amount by Plaintiff” in attached Form 2, which is the difference between July 2014 and July 2015 (in the case of general employees), which is the difference after deducting the amount already paid from the overtime work allowance, from each of the overtime work hours from July 2014 (in the case of general employees), and from May 2017.

B. In the case of Defendant Special Area Work Allowances, only paid to employees working in the urban areas, such as Jeju-do, etc., but not included in ordinary wages.

2. Determination

A. Inasmuch as there is no dispute between the parties that the rest of the additional benefits, excluding the special area service allowances, among the respective additional benefits claimed by the Plaintiffs, should be included in the ordinary wages, we examine only whether the disputed special area service allowances should be included in the ordinary wages.

According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 3 and the whole arguments, the defendant's internal employee fee rules provide that the criteria for payment of special area service allowance shall be "basic monthly salary x 6%", the details shall be paid to employees of Grade 6 or higher working in the area of "books" (Do, etc.). Accordingly, the defendant can be found to have uniformly paid an amount equivalent to 6% of the basic monthly salary if an employee of Grade 6 or higher working in the island area is an employee of Grade 6 or higher, and the above facts are found.