(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.10.17 2018가단3668

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.10.17 2018가단3668

임금

Text

1. The Defendant (Appointeds) KRW 28,940,823, KRW 15,789,582, and KRW 8,568,586 to the Appointeds D.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From January 1, 2013 to January 31, 2018, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) were employed as an employee at the “F” workplace located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, the Defendant operated.

B. The Defendant did not pay the Plaintiffs wages and retirement allowances under the pretext of weekly leave allowances, and the period of service by each Plaintiff and the amount of unpaid wages and retirement allowances are as stated in the separate sheet.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 (A) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. If so, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiffs the unpaid leave allowance and retirement allowance for the portion of the unpaid leave allowance.

3. The defendant's assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the argument was that the Plaintiffs and the Defendant agreed to pay the bonus, retirement allowance, and extra-hour holiday allowance together with the payment of both allowances. As such, the Defendant is not obliged to pay the Plaintiffs a retirement allowance and weekly holiday allowance.

Therefore, the claim of this case constitutes abuse of rights, and must be offset against retirement allowances already paid by the defendant to the plaintiffs.

B. (1) The Plaintiffs are seeking payment of the unpaid holiday allowance in the instant lawsuit.

Nevertheless, the defendant asserts that there is no obligation to pay temporary disability compensation benefits since it is included in daily paid holiday allowances which are irrelevant to the above, and thus, it is not reasonable to accept the above assertion as a assertion as to non-related matters.

(2) An agreement was concluded between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant to pay retirement allowances in advance, including the retirement allowances, and accordingly, the retirement allowances were included in the monthly salary.

Even though retirement pay is a requirement for the termination of a labor relationship, it occurs only.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.06.21 2018가합192

-서울고등법원 2018.05.11 2017나2047282

-인천지방법원 2018.10.05 2018고정1387

-울산지방법원 2017.04.26 2016가단23938

-청주지방법원충주지원 2019.11.29 2019가단2332