1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part against plaintiffs A, B, C, D, E, and F is revoked, and the above plaintiffs were expanded by this court.

Facts of recognition

The court's explanation about this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows.

Except for partial revision like paragraph, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of Paragraph 1, and it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which revises the upper part of the judgment, is as follows: (a) the fixed pay system for full-time teachers of the faculty under the classification of the upper part of the judgment of the court of first instance; (b) the fixed pay system for regular employees (general administration, function) in the annual salary system of the non-standing teachers under the annual salary system; and (c) each of the “attached wage settlement table” in the first instance judgment of the court of first instance of the employment contract No. 6 of the annual salary system of the annual salary system of the employment contract; and (d) the “the same shall apply to the relevant money” in the 6th part of the judgment of the court of first instance as “attached Table 1”; and (e) the same shall apply to the relevant money (the relevant money is the same as the relevant money written in the column of “paid wages by May 2018” in attached

"At the same time, the basic salary and allowances that the plaintiffs A, B, C, D, E, G, H, J, K, K, L, M, and N should have been paid from June 2018 to June 2019 according to the existing salary regulations for teachers and staff from June 6, 2019 are the same as the corresponding amount stated in the "total Standard Wage" and "total allowances" in attached Table 2. Here, the said plaintiffs' wage regulations and the wage agreement of 2017 excludes the money actually paid to the above plaintiffs pursuant to the above provision of the same Table (=amount unpaid wages) are the same as the amount stated in the "total Amount of Additional Unpaid Wages". The above plaintiffs A, B, C, D, E, E, F's claim for the wage system applied to the above plaintiffs' wage system by claiming that the above plaintiffs' wage system was applied according to the wage contract of this case.

Therefore, the existing rules of employment are revised disadvantageously.