beta
Text
1. The Defendant: 23,295,455 won to Plaintiff A; 10,892,228 won to Plaintiff B; 19,070,753 won to Plaintiff C; and 32,653 won to Plaintiff D.
Reasons
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. Fact-finding 1) Defendant Company is a company producing a telecommunications cap entering a portable credit card meter. The Plaintiffs were employed by the research institute affiliated with the research institute responsible for the development of software and hardware and worked in the Defendant Company by November 30, 2015. (2) The Plaintiffs entered into an employment contract between the Defendant Company and the Defendant Company by no later than March 3, 2015, and the annual salary contract entered into by March 2014 set out by the Plaintiffs as the annual salary for each individual, and “the annual salary for the term contract shall include statutory allowances (day/long work). Other welfare benefits, etc. shall comply with separate standards.”
(3) On March 2015, Plaintiff B, C, and E drafted a new annual salary contract with the Defendant Company on or around March 2015. The above contract separately determines the contractual working hours during which overtime work allowances are paid for 84 hours a month, and agreed to pay KRW 1,632,09 for Plaintiff B and C, and KRW 1,314,206 for Plaintiff E as overtime work allowances (Article 5 of each annual salary contract). Meanwhile, Plaintiff A did not prepare a new annual salary contract after a consultation on annual salary negotiations between Defendant Company and Defendant Company on annual salary in 2015, but Plaintiff D did not prepare a labor contract even though there was a verbal agreement on annual salary in 2015, but the contract was not prepared. The Plaintiffs calculated the amount of unpaid wages to Defendant C’s branch office based on the attached Table No. 1,632,09 for overtime work allowances and overtime work allowances against Defendant Company.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 4, 5, and 6, and Suwon District Court's Sung-nam support.