logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.09 2014가합519066
퇴직금
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Under the Credit Information Use and Protection Act, the Plaintiffs shall enter into an agency contract or delegation contract with the Defendant company, which is engaged in debt collection and credit investigation business with the permission of the Financial Services Commission, and the “period of service” in the attached retirement allowance calculation table shall be the debt collection officers who performed debt management and debt collection business during each service period as indicated in the attached

[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 1-1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 16-1 through 13, Eul evidence No. 27-1 through 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Although the Plaintiffs concluded an agency contract or delegation contract with the Defendant formally, the Plaintiffs are deemed workers as prescribed by the Labor Standards Act, since they actually provided labor to the Defendant by being subordinate to the Defendant, such as being subject to considerable direction and supervision from the Defendant in performing their duties.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay retirement allowances under the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act to the plaintiffs.

B. The Plaintiffs are independent entrepreneurs who have entered into an agency contract or delegation contract on an equal basis with the Defendant, and are engaged in their own business, and are not workers under the Labor Standards Act under the command and supervision of the Defendant for the purpose of wages.

Therefore, the defendant does not have a duty to pay retirement allowances under the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act to the plaintiffs.

3. Determination as to whether the plaintiffs are workers under the Labor Standards Act

A. In determining whether a worker is a worker under the relevant legal doctrine, the determination shall be based on whether a contract form is an employment contract or a contract for employment, and in substance, whether a worker provided labor in a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages at the business or workplace, and whether a subordinate relationship exists shall be determined by the employer, and the rules of employment or employment shall apply to the rules of employment.

arrow