Whether the retirement allowance payment provision excluded bonus from the calculation of the retirement allowance is illegal

Even if the remuneration provision of the Secretariat of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry excludes bonuses from the basis of calculation of retirement allowances, if the amount of retirement of an employee calculated according to such provision is adopted as a result of the adoption of the progressive payment rate, and the above payment provision does not violate the Labor Standards Act.

Article 28 of the Labor Standards Act

Supreme Court Decision 78Da2372, 79Da136 Decided February 27, 1979

[Judgment of the court below]

[Judgment of the court below] Defendant 1 and 1 others

Gwangju High Court Decision 84Na289 delivered on December 19, 1984

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The grounds of appeal No. 3 are examined.

According to the provisions of Article 20 of the Defendant’s Secretariat’s wage rules, the amount of the Defendant’s retirement allowance shall be calculated on the basis of the principal salary and the allowance at the time of retirement. According to the provisions of Part III of the above wage rules, the Defendant’s retirement allowance shall be calculated on the basis of the principal salary and the allowance at the time of retirement. According to the provisions of Part III of the above wage rules, the Defendant’s work allowance and overtime work allowance are limited to the category of the Defendant’s work allowance and overtime work allowance, and the bonus shall not be included in the above allowance, and the provisions of Part IV of the above wage rules are separate in relation to the bonus. Meanwhile, according to the provisions of Article 1 of the above wage rules, the bonus shall not be calculated on the basis of the calculation of the retirement allowance, and even if the Defendant’s above provision excludes the bonus from the basis of the calculation of the retirement allowance, the amount of the Plaintiff’s retirement allowance calculated on the basis of the above payment rate under Article 28 of the Labor Standards Act, it does not seem to violate the above wage rules (see Supreme Court Decision 27Da37273797.7.

However, according to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below calculated the retirement amount on the basis of the monthly average wage of the plaintiff on the ground that there is no dispute between the parties as to the facts that the monthly average wage of the plaintiff was 516,510 in calculating the retirement amount at the time of retirement in accordance with the above benefit provision. The above monthly average wage included the bonus excluded from the basis for the calculation of retirement allowance under the defendant's wage provision, as seen above, is obvious in the plaintiff's own assertion, and there is no dispute as to the amount of the plaintiff's monthly average wage at the time of retirement, and it cannot be said that there is no dispute as to the fact that the monthly average wage of the plaintiff is the basis for the calculation of the monthly average wage, including bonuses, unlike the defendant's wage provision at the time of retirement. Thus, the above judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of the contents of the parties' assertion or erroneous interpretation of the defendant's provision on retirement allowance, and it constitutes the ground for reversal of Article 12 of the

Therefore, without proceeding to decide on other grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the Gwangju High Court which is the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Jae-hee (Presiding Justice)