logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.08.21 2014나9065
임금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

The defendant admitting the judgment of the court of first instance is arguing that the part of the plaintiff's claim of this case, which was partially accepted by the judgment of the court of first instance, is calculated by including the food costs in ordinary wages, and only

Therefore, this court's explanation in the court of first instance is the same as the written judgment in the court of first instance, in addition to the following parts of the reasoning of the judgment in the court of first instance that are stated between the 10th to the 11th st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st st.

On the other hand, the plaintiff asserts that the amount of food expenses falls under ordinary wages because all workers have been paid periodically, uniformly, 80,000 won regularly and uniformly, and the defendant paid food expenses for compensating for actual expenses. Thus, even if food expenses fall under the ordinary wages, it does not constitute wages, and even if food expenses fall under the amount of food expenses, the remaining amount after deducting the amount of food expenses actually used by the plaintiffs from the amount of 80,000 won determined according to the monthly formula was paid to the plaintiffs each month, and therefore, it does not constitute ordinary wages. Therefore, it is argued

Compensation money for actual expenses paid by a worker to reimburse additional expenses incurred in performing his/her duties in a special working condition or environment, or money paid mutually to an employer without a payment obligation, etc. shall not be included in the total amount of wages as the basis for calculating the average wage.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Da10650 delivered on April 22, 2003). In addition, a collective agreement explicitly states that providing meals to workers is purely welfare. If workers do not provide meals, the employer’s provision of meals to workers is replaced by other goods or cash.

arrow