The defendant's KRW 93,289,670 to the plaintiff and 6% per annum from November 5, 2019 to June 18, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a government-invested institution that performs the duty of subrogation on the part of the Minister of Employment and Labor to pay unpaid wages under the Wage Claim Guarantee Act and the vicarious exercise of the right to claim wages.

B. The Defendant, while running a fire-fighting equipment construction business, etc. in a leisure season C, was virtually discontinued on March 2019 due to the aggravation of management status.

C. However, the defendant is employed by the defendant at the time.

On November 5, 2019, the Plaintiff paid 93,289,670 won as substitute payment on behalf of the Defendant pursuant to the Wage Claim Guarantee Act on November 5, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff may subrogate the Plaintiff’s right to claim the unpaid wages, etc. to the Defendant, who is the employer, within the limit of the substitute payment that the Plaintiff paid to the employees as above. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above KRW 93,289,670, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from November 5, 2019 to June 18, 2020, a copy of the complaint of this case was served on the Defendant from June 18, 2020, and 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day

B. 1) The defendant's special representative B was merely a spouse of the deceased E, the representative of the defendant, and was not involved in the management of the defendant's company, and was actually divorced from the deceased E, and was judged to waive inheritance after the deceased E's death, and thus the plaintiff's claim of this case was unfair. 2) The plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendant corporation, not against the defendant's special representative, but against the defendant corporation.