1. The defendant 7,303,290 won to the plaintiff A, 642,170 won to the plaintiff B, 2,483,720 won to the plaintiff C, and 2,966.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From January 1, 1999; from August 9, 2005; from August 9, 2005; from June 1, 2005; Plaintiff C, from June 1, 2005; and Plaintiff D, from May 18, 2000, retired on June 30, 2013.

B. The retirement allowance of the Plaintiff A calculated on the basis of the time of retirement is 22,543,160 won, the retirement allowance of the Plaintiff B is 8,698,550 won, the retirement allowance of the Plaintiff C is 14,325,410 won, and the retirement allowance of the Plaintiff D is 14,30,640 won.

C. The Plaintiff paid the Plaintiff KRW 10,286,780 to the Defendants as retirement allowances, KRW 7,178,60 to the Plaintiff B, KRW 10,845,520 to the Plaintiff C, and KRW 7,208,680 to the Plaintiff D.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 11, and 18, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff A the unpaid retirement allowance of 12,256,380 won, the 1,519,950 won to the plaintiff B, the 3,479,890 won to the plaintiff C, and the 7,091,960 won to the plaintiff D, and damages for delay.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant's argument on the interim settlement of the retirement allowance is that the defendant prepared a monthly request for the payment of the retirement allowance with the purport that "if the defendant entered into an employment contract with the defendant, it would be required to make the monthly settlement of the retirement allowance to be paid each month after his/her continuous service for at least one year, and the defendant paid the monthly retirement allowance to be paid each month by December 31, 2006 in accordance with the written request for the payment of the monthly retirement allowance submitted by the plaintiffs as of December 31, 2006, the retirement allowance not paid to the plaintiffs does not remain. 2) According to the written evidence No. 9 and No. 11 of the judgment, the plaintiffs paid the retirement allowance with the defendant as of December 31, 2006, and submitted it to the defendant. Accordingly, it is recognized that the defendant paid the monthly payment of the retirement allowance with the monthly interim settlement of the

Retirement pay means the termination of a labor relationship, which is retirement.