1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 16, 2017, the Plaintiff joined and served as an employee of the “C” operated by the Defendant, and retired on February 5, 2018.

B. The Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff’s total of KRW 6,756,30 out of the wages corresponding to the above working period, and the Defendant was convicted on November 8, 2018 (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2018Da1706) and the said judgment became final and conclusive as it is, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s delayed payment was made against the Plaintiff.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of 6,756,330 won payable to the Plaintiff and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from February 20, 2018 to the date of full payment, 14 days after the Plaintiff’s retirement date, barring any special circumstance.

B. Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant asserts that wages equivalent to the said 17-day period should be deducted since the date when the Plaintiff was absent from work or left work without permission during the period of work falls under the said 17-day period. However, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff was absent from work without permission or left work without permission, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. 2) The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s damage claim against the Plaintiff was offset against the Plaintiff’s claim for damages, since the Plaintiff neglected to work during the period of work and incurred damage to the Defendant.

In light of the above, there is no evidence to prove that there was damage to the defendant due to the plaintiff's neglect of duty, and even if acknowledged, since wages for workers should be paid directly to the worker, the employer's claims against the worker, except for the over-paid claim for refund of wages, cannot be offset against the worker's wage claims. Thus, Supreme Court Decision on May 20, 2010