1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) amounting to KRW 21,573,500, and KRW 1,840,320 and each of the above costs.

1. Determination on the main claim

A. (1) The defendant is a company that manufactures construction material equipment, wholesale and retail business, export and import business, etc. in Yangsan City D.

(B) On June 27, 2012, the Defendant served as a factory site and did not pay the wages of KRW 19,290,000 and retirement allowances of KRW 2,283,50 to the retirement allowances from February 29, 2013 to November 201, 2013.

(C) In addition, the Defendant was serving as a production worker on July 16, 2012 and did not pay the wages of KRW 1,50,000 from October 29, 2013 to November 28, 2013, and the wages of KRW 290,320 from October 28, 2013 to November 28, 2013.

[Grounds for recognition] According to the facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 3 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings (2) the above recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff A the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from December 14, 2013 to the date of complete payment of each of the above amounts, barring special circumstances, with respect to the total amount of wages and retirement allowances No. 21,573,500, the total amount of wages and retirement allowances No. 1,840,320, and each of the above amounts to the plaintiff B.

B. The defendant's assertion argues that the defendant's claim for wages and retirement benefits of this case against the defendant, which is premised on the labor contract relations, is unfair since the defendant, representative director E and the plaintiffs engaged in the business of processing a new scrap metal.

However, there is no evidence to prove that there was a partnership between E and the plaintiffs. Rather, the plaintiffs' work as the defendant's employee is the same as the above, so the defendant's above assertion is without merit

2. Judgment on the defendant's counterclaim

A. The defendant's assertion (1) The defendant paid 4.6 million won to the plaintiffs for repair because of intentional breakdown of automatic shot and manual air, which is the machine that produces shotes in the defendant's factory, and ② the above mechanical trouble.