1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant was the owner of the coastal and coastal fishing vessel C (hereinafter “instant vessel”) at the time of loading, and the Plaintiff was the person who was on board the instant vessel and worked as a seafarer.

B. On September 30, 2014, the Defendant introduced the Plaintiff from D and consulted with the Plaintiff as a seafarer. The Plaintiff was on board the instant vessel until October 30, 2014.

C. The Defendant transferred KRW 2,500,000 to the Plaintiff on October 6, 2014, and KRW 2,500,000 on October 26, 2014 to each E account. D.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff and F filed a complaint against the Defendant as a violation of the Seafarers’ Act (hereinafter “related criminal case”), and the Daejeon District Court’s Seosan Branch (2015 High Court Decision 254) acquitted the Defendant on November 3, 2014 that it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant terminated the seafarer labor contract with the Plaintiff and F without justifiable grounds. Daejeon District Court (2016No470) dismissed the prosecutor’s appeal, and the said appellate judgment became final and conclusive on September 1, 2016.

【Reasons for Recognition】 Each entry in the evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 5 and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The shipowner of the plaintiff's assertion shall pay the seafarer an amount equivalent to two months of ordinary wages as unemployment allowances in addition to retirement allowances where the seafarer has terminated the seafarer labor contract in the absence of a cause attributable to the seafarer.

The Plaintiff entered into a seafarer labor contract with the Defendant to receive KRW 5,00,000 as monthly salary, and the Defendant unilaterally terminated the seafarer labor contract around November 3, 2014.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the unemployment allowance of KRW 10,000,000 corresponding to the second month portion of ordinary wages and delay damages.

(Plaintiffs claim wages, but, in light of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff’s claim for unemployment allowances. (B)

Judgment

It can be recognized according to the above evidence and the purport of the whole pleadings.