1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion B is the Defendant’s representative director or internal director from 2006 to 30 November 2013, 2013, which was after the provisional seizure of the instant claim. The Plaintiff’s assertion B had a benefit claim against the Defendant.

The minimum amount of 1.2 million won to be prohibited from seizure and collection order of this case shall apply to the collection order of this case.

The amount of benefits from January 2006 to November 201, 2013 and the amount seized by the seizure and collection order of the instant claim is equal to the following table. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 52.6 million, which the Plaintiff seeks according to the seizure and collection order of the instant claim.

The monthly salary of the year is excluded from the minimum amount of monthly salary of 2006 1.3 million won per year, 1.2 million won per 1.2 million won per 1.3 million won per 1.3 million won per 2 million won per 1.3 million won per 1.2 million won per 1.4 million won per 5 million won per 4.4 million won per 5.4 million won per 5 million won per 2.6 million won per 1.8 million won per 2.6 million won per 2.8 million won per 9.8 million won per 2.6 million won per 2 million won per 1.3 million won per 1.6 million won per 2 million, and the defendant's report on the monthly salary of 2.8 million won per 1.3 million won per 8 million won per 2.6 million won per 1.3 million won per 2 million, as the defendant's report on the monthly salary of 2008.

Even if B had a wage claim against the Defendant, this is either less than 1.2 million won of the minimum cost of living under Article 246(1)4 of the Civil Execution Act, and the former Enforcement Decree of the Civil Execution Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 18964, Jul. 26, 2005; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree of the Civil Execution Act”) or more substantially exceeds it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's instant case.