1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs each amount stated in the "total" column for each plaintiff in the attached list.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiffs are employed by the Defendant who operates a passenger transport service and provide the Defendant with work as a driver.

Persons who have retired or have been currently serving in the Republic of Korea shall be those.

B. The Defendant, including the Plaintiffs, has paid daily allowances to drivers belonging to the operation of buses on the vehicle operation day regardless of whether they actually own meals or decorations on the vehicle operation day, such as the cost of meals and armores.

C. The Defendant calculated various allowances and bonuses by excluding the above daily expenses from ordinary wages, and paid them to the Plaintiffs. If the above daily expenses are to be included in the ordinary wages from May 2013 to June 2016, the amount that the Defendant is to pay to the Plaintiffs is as stated in the column of “total” in the attached Table.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 13 (including provisional number), Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The Defendant’s main defense against the Defendant’s main defense agreed with the Plaintiffs to not claim ordinary wages, etc. in the future with respect to the daily expenses from April 1, 2014, and thus, the Plaintiffs’ lawsuit corresponding to the above period is unlawful.

B. According to the written evidence Nos. 1 through 5 of the judgment, it is recognized that drivers belonging to the Defendant, including the Plaintiffs, who received daily expenses from April 1, 2014, such as the cost of meals and armores, and do not claim ordinary wages, etc. related thereto.

However, it is null and void in violation of the Labor Standards Act, which is a mandatory law, to waive the right to claim wages that will occur in the future in advance or to not file a civil lawsuit thereon in advance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da49732, Mar. 27, 1998).