1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of KRW 7,650,000 to the head of the branch office of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) commenced its business from January 1, 2002, and discontinued its business around August 14, 2008 due to business deterioration. D, working for the instant company, filed an application for recognition of bankruptcy, etc. with the head of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency B branch office (hereinafter “the head of the Defendant B branch office”) on August 22, 2008 on the ground that it did not receive wages from the instant company. The head of the Defendant B branch office recognized the fact of bankruptcy, etc. against the instant company on October 30, 2008.

B. From July 12, 2004 to March 24, 2008, the Plaintiff was a repair science debate instructor at the instant company. On October 29, 2010, the Plaintiff submitted an application for confirmation of the fact of substitute payment and a request for substitute payment by asserting that the Defendant B did not receive retirement pay (hereinafter “instant application for substitute payment”), and on December 1, 2010, the head of Defendant B notified the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff cannot be deemed an employee under the Labor Standards Act, and thus, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed an employee under the Labor Standards Act.

C. On December 1, 2010, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on February 23, 201, against the notification by the head of Defendant B branch office on the confirmation of non-existence of substitute payment. The Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling on November 29, 201 that “the notification by the head of Defendant B branch office against the Plaintiff on December 1, 2010 is revoked.”

On November 29, 2011, the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a decision that the Plaintiff constitutes a worker under the Labor Standards Act. On January 27, 2012, the Plaintiff submitted an application for confirmation of facts of substitute payment and a request for substitute payment by asserting that the Plaintiff failed to receive wages, suspension of business, and retirement allowances (hereinafter “application for substitute payment in this case”) to the head of the Defendant B branch office (hereinafter “applicant for substitute payment in this case”). As to this, the head of Defendant B branch office notified the Plaintiff on December 1, 2010.