beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 1,170,00 for the Plaintiff (Appointed Party); (b) KRW 490,000 for the appointed Party C; and (c) KRW 630,00 for the appointed Party D.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant was the 6-time nationwide local elections implemented on June 4, 2014, and was the person who participated in the election campaign for the Defendant as an election campaign worker during the election campaign period from May 22, 2014 to June 3, 2014, and the designated parties, including the Plaintiff (appointed parties), including the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff, etc.”) (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff, etc.”) were the persons who participated in the election campaign for the Defendant as an election campaign worker during the election campaign period.
B. The Plaintiff et al. was paid daily wages from the Defendant and conducted an election campaign. The wages that the Plaintiff et al. did not receive are KRW 1,170,000 for the Plaintiff (Appointed Party), KRW 490,00 for the Selection C, KRW 630,00 for the Selection E, F, G, H, I, and J, KRW 410,00 for the Selection, KRW 60,000 for the Selection, KRW 1,010,00 for the Selection, KRW 1,070 for the Selection, KRW 1,170,000 for the Selection, and KRW 3,060,00 for the Selection.
[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 8, Evidence No. 9-1 to No. 14, and purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) 1,170,000 won as wages, 490,000 won to the Selection Party C, 630,000 won to the Selection Party E, F, G, H, I, and J respectively, 60,000 won to the Selection Party K, 1,070,0000 won to the Selection Party L, 1,70,0000 won to the Selection Party, and 1,070,000 won to the Selection Party N, 3,060,0000 won to the Selection Party, and 3,00,0000 won to the Selection Party C, and 630,000 won to the Selection Party E, F, H, I, and J, 60,000 won per annum from June 26, 2015 to September 30, 2015 (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2515, supra).
Therefore, the plaintiff (designated party)'s claim of this case (including part of the appointed party) is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are justified.