The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant, as the representative director of the D Co., Ltd., in Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwangjin-gu, 1709, is an employer who ordinarily employs 66 workers and operates dispatched business.

When a worker retires, the employer shall pay the wages, compensations, and all other money and valuables within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred.

Provided, That the date may be extended by mutual agreement between the parties in extenuating circumstances.

Nevertheless, the Defendant is working from March 1, 2011 to February 29, 2012 at the above workplace.

The retirement E did not pay KRW 1,435,00,00 for weekly paid leave allowances and monthly paid allowances within 14 days from the date of retirement, which is the date of the occurrence of the cause for payment, without any agreement between the parties to the extension of the due date.

2. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion that they concluded a labor contract with E by determining wages including various allowances, such as weekly leave allowances, monthly leave allowances, etc., which are no less favorable to workers, and thus, are valid, and thus, paid all wages accordingly, the payment of allowances is not to be made. Even if not, there was no intention to do so on the part of the Defendant and his defense counsel.

3. Determination

A. In a case where an employer concludes a labor contract without calculating a basic wage in a manner that determines the basic wage of the employee and pays the employee a premium in addition to the allowance based on such determination. However, in a case where the employer concludes a wage payment contract based on the so-called comprehensive wage system with the content that the total amount of the allowance is determined as a monthly wage or daily wage, or that the amount of the monthly fixed amount is paid as an allowance, it shall not be null and void if it is deemed that there is no disadvantage to the employee and that it is justifiable in light of all the circumstances.

Supreme Court Decision 2005No. 19500 Decided August 19, 2005