1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

On March 28, 2011, the Plaintiff served as the head of the business team in D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) established with the purpose of the sale and purchase, collection, etc. of claims as its business objective, and retired from office on or before June 30, 2011.

D around June 30, 201, the business activity was suspended and discontinued on September 8, 2011.

On June 15, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for recognition of bankruptcy, etc. under Article 5(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Wage Claim Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25630, Sept. 24, 2014; hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”) with D as an employer who wishes to receive unpaid wages and retirement allowances from the Defendant.

On March 28, 2013, the Defendant issued a notice of non-recognition of bankruptcy, etc. (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 5(1) of the Enforcement Decree and Article 4 of the Enforcement Rule of the Wage Claim Guarantee Act on the ground that D cannot be deemed to have operated the pertinent business for more than six months from the date of establishment of the workplace.

On June 28, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the request on February 11, 2014.

【The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to whether the disposition of this case was legitimate or not, is unlawful for the following reasons. The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to the facts without any dispute, Gap’s 1 and 2, Gap’s 3-3, Gap’s 4, 5 (the same as Eul’s 2) and 7

In light of the provisions and purport of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Wage Claim Guarantee Act, the requirements for employers for at least 6 months under Article 8 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Guarantee of Wage Claims are stipulated as the requirement that employers have engaged in the relevant business for at least

The requirement for the payment of a substitute payment is insufficient, and it does not fall under the requirements for the recognition of the fact of bankruptcy, etc. as a premise for the claim for a substitute payment.

Therefore, D is based on the reason that D has failed to meet the requirements of business owner for more than six months.