1. The appeal against the counterclaim Defendant is dismissed.

2. The Lessee expanded by this Court.

Basic facts are corporations established for the purpose of concluding insurance contracts by proxy, training, dispatch, etc.

From October 1, 2009 to July 31, 2016, Defendant B retired while engaging in tele-marketing business as an employee of the counter-resident, from September 2, 2013 to July 31, 2016.

[Grounds for recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 8 and 11, and the purport of the argument of the plaintiff in the counter-party to the lawsuit as to the whole, the plaintiff in the counter-party to the lawsuit was prepared a labor contract with the counter-party to include the retirement pay in the monthly salary as in January 2015 and pay it to the employees including the counter-party in the past, and whether the payment was made later by asking whether it was made separately.

Therefore, the counterclaim Defendant entered into an agreement on the actual division of retirement allowances with the counterclaim, and received a certain amount each month as retirement allowances, and the retirement allowances paid to the counterclaim Defendant B prior to July 26, 2012 were effective by the interim settlement agreement under Article 8(2) of the former Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act (amended by Act No. 10967, Jul. 25, 201). Therefore, if the counterclaim Defendant is obligated to pay retirement allowances for the said period to the counterclaim Defendant B, the counterclaim Defendant shall return the retirement allowances paid to the counterclaim Nonparty B as unjust enrichment.

In addition, retirement allowances received by the counterclaim Defendant from July 26, 2012 to February 24, 2015, pursuant to the actual retirement allowance division agreement, and even if the said division agreement has no effect against the mandatory provisions, the counterclaim Defendant shall return the amount of retirement allowances paid in installments during the said period to the counterclaim in unjust enrichment.

On the other hand, on February 25, 2015, the counterclaim Defendant and the counterclaim Plaintiff should include retirement allowances in their monthly pay.