1. The defendant shall pay 26,50,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from September 1, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

1. On July 1, 2003, the Plaintiff was solicited to retire and retired on February 28, 2014 while working for the Defendant Company as a member of the company. At the time, the Defendant Company shall pay retirement consolation benefits at the rate of KRW 26.5 million equivalent to the basic salary for six months, and the fact that the Plaintiff promised to pay the same in installments for six months after retirement is not in dispute between the parties, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 26.5 million and damages for delay.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant asserts that the contract of gift without written basis constitutes a gift contract, and that the payment agreement of retirement consolation money is cancelled in accordance with Article 555 of the Civil Act, since it is an expression of intent of non-written gift.

A gift under the Civil Act is a juristic act which takes effect by expressing an intention to confer property free of charge to the other party, and the other party approves it. The retirement consolation money in this case has the nature of remuneration as a subsequent wage paid in consideration of the performance of duties while in office, or has the nature of recompense or compensation for termination by an agreement in labor relations, and is in a resignation and a quid pro quo relationship by the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant's assertion that the retirement consolation money in this case falls under a gift contract under the Civil Act cannot be

B. The Defendant asserted the terms and conditions of the instant retirement consolation money payment agreement conditioned on the condition that the Plaintiff would not inflict damage on the Defendant by divulging the Defendant’s trade secrets and information after his retirement. However, the Plaintiff’s departure from office to B, who was the Defendant’s competitor, spreads false facts as to the Defendant using the Defendant’s trade secrets and information, and solicits the employees of the Defendant to leave from office.