logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.03.15 2015가단129577
약정금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 50,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from September 2, 2015 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 12, 2012, the Plaintiff entered the Defendant Company with the introduction of D, and entered into an annual salary contract with the purport that the total annual salary amounting to KRW 50 million at the time of the said employment, the contract period from July 12, 2012 to July 11, 2013, and the retirement allowance amount to the Plaintiff’s actual retirement pay after one year’s continuous service, and the payment after the expiration of the contract period, and the annual performance rate may be paid according to performance.

B. After joining the Defendant Company, the Plaintiff served as the head of the Technical Headquarters in the Daegu-gun E New Construction Project contracted by the Defendant from Hyundai Construction (hereinafter “E Corporation”).

After comparing and examining the terms and conditions of the construction project of the E in comparison with other construction works and relevant statutes, the Plaintiff prepared a “written request for consultation on construction costs following the contract modification” and sent it to Hyundai Construction. The Plaintiff agreed to increase the construction cost by KRW 1.4 billion after consulting with the said documents.

Grounds for recognition: A1-4, B 1 (including various numbers), witness F, and the whole purport of the pleading.

2. The plaintiff agreed to pay the bonus additionally according to the plaintiff's performance at the time of joining the defendant company. The plaintiff's efforts that the E construction cost increased to KRW 1.4 billion and the defendant agreed to pay the plaintiff a bonus of KRW 50 million. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 50 million and delay damages to the plaintiff.

In light of the above evidence, the annual salary contract prepared by the Plaintiff at the time of joining the Defendant Company was stated as the performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance-based performance

arrow