logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.05.29 2017나72256
임금
Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is subject to KRW 11,032,075.

Reasons

1. The basic facts are limited liability companies (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Company”) that engage in liquor wholesale business in G in Guang City. The Plaintiff is a person who delivers alcoholic beverages to the Defendant Company’s customer and then delivers alcoholic beverages to the Defendant Company upon receiving the payment from the said customer. D is the Plaintiff’s wife.

On April 13, 2015, the Plaintiff was prosecuted for facts constituting an offense listed in the attached Table with the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch, and on August 19, 2016, the Suwon District Court of the Republic of Korea recognized all criminal facts as guilty, and sentenced the Plaintiff to one year and six months of imprisonment and two years of suspension of execution (case No. 2015Ma791, 1845 (Merger)), and the above case was finalized on April 28, 2017 through the appellate court (Case No. 2016No540) at the Suwon District Court’s appellate court (Case No. 2016No540).

(hereinafter referred to as “related criminal case”). [Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 10 and 17, substantial fact in the court, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Of the judgment of the court of first instance on the defenses prior to the merits of the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim, the statement Nos. 2, 13 through 19, 4, 19 to 13, 5.

3. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is premised on the fact that the Defendant Company had worked for the Defendant Company from September 1, 2008 to March 5, 2013, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 34,274,726 in total and KRW 27,274,726 in the amount of retirement pay paid on February 1, 2013, which was unpaid by the Defendant Company.

B. Whether the contract constitutes a worker under the Labor Standards Act, regardless of whether the contract is an employment contract or a contract for work under the Civil Act, or whether the worker provided work in a subordinate relationship with the employer for the purpose of wages in substance. In determining this, the contents of work are determined by the employer.

arrow