2014Da87496 Retirement Allowance, etc.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

Suwon District Court Decision 20141957 Decided November 13, 2014

June 11, 2015

The part of the judgment of the court below against the plaintiff is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Suwon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Even if an average wage is calculated in accordance with the principle prescribed by the Labor Standards Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Labor Standards Act, the change of the amount of wages due to the special and unexpected circumstances that may arise from the employee’

Therefore, in exceptional cases where it is deemed that the average wage calculated as above was significantly less or more reasonable than ordinary cases when comprehensively assessing the circumstances, including the entire period of work of workers, the period of changes in the amount of wages, and the degree of changes in the amount of wages, etc., the calculation of retirement pay based on such exceptional circumstances cannot be permitted in light of the spirit of the Labor Standards Act that intends to calculate the amount of retirement pay based on the ordinary amount of living wages. Thus, it is necessary to separately calculate the average wage by a reasonable and reasonable method that can reflect the ordinary amount of living wages of workers (Supreme Court Decision 2009Da415, Apr. 15, 2010).

See, 19396, et al.)

According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record, the Plaintiff was absent from office from office from July 13, 2013 to September 8, 2013 while serving as a member of the Defendant’s operation on October 23, 2009, and the Plaintiff was absent from office from office from September 9, 2013 to September 8, 2013.

9. The fact that the Plaintiff retired on September 14, 2013 while serving again until September 14, 2013; the wages paid during the three-month period from June 14, 2013 to June 30, 2013 were calculated as wages of 895, 988, 112, 934, and monthly wages of 1,12, 934, and monthly wages of 257, 735 won from September 9, 2013 to September 13, 2013; the amount calculated as wages of 2,26,657 won for such period divided as the total number of days during the said period by 92,00 won for 24, 637 won (hereinafter the same shall apply); the total amount of wages paid to the Plaintiff during the period from June 14, 2013 to June 30, 2013 + the amount of wages paid to the Plaintiff during the period of 30th five months.

1. As wages of KRW 1, 112, and 934 from July 12, 199, the fact that if the amount of average wages is divided by 91 per total number of days during that period, the amount of average wages is calculated as KRW 78,959.

Examining such factual relations in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the amount of average wages calculated based on the wages received between the three months prior to the date of retirement by the Plaintiff may be deemed to be significantly below the ordinary living wages that the Plaintiff received during the entire period of employment. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s average wages should not be calculated based on the paid wages between the three months prior to the date of retirement, but be calculated by a reasonable and reasonable method that can reflect the Plaintiff’s ordinary living wages

Nevertheless, the lower court calculated the Plaintiff’s average wage on the ground of the wage that the Plaintiff received during the three-month period prior to September 14, 2013, which constitutes a case where the lower court made a decision contrary to the Supreme Court’s precedent regarding the calculation of average wage. The allegation in the grounds of appeal assigning this error is with merit

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the part against the plaintiff among the judgment below is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jo Hee-de

Note Justice Lee Sang-hoon

Justices Kim Jae-tae

Justices Park Sang-ok