logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.06.08 2015가단41517
면책확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a government-invested institution that performs the business of subrogated to the employee's right to claim wages and retirement allowances within the limits of the amount paid by the retired employee on behalf of the employer after receiving entrustment from the Minister of Employment and Labor under Articles 7 and 27 of the Wage Claim Guarantee Act and the employer has decided to commence rehabilitation procedures, etc.

B. On June 21, 2010, the “C hotel” in Daejeon Dong-gu Daejeon (business registration representative D) reported the closure of business on June 21, 2010, and 11 employees E, including workers E, did not pay 34,366,160 won in total for the last three months’ wages and retirement allowances for three years.

C. Around September 2010, F, a worker of C hotel, filed an application for fact-finding with the Daejeon Regional Employment and Labor Office for C hotel’s “application for bankruptcy, etc.” Based on the Plaintiff and F’s statement that the Plaintiff is the actual business owner of C hotel, the Daejeon Regional Employment and Labor Office notified the Defendant of fact-finding, including bankruptcy, on December 27, 2012.

On January 26, 2011, the Defendant paid 34,366,160 won to 11, including E, in total as wages for the last three months and retirement allowances for the last three years on behalf of the business owner of the C hotel, by recognizing that the business owner of the C hotel has no ability to pay the unpaid wages and retirement allowances.

E. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff was the actual business owner of the C hotel as Daejeon District Court Decision 2012Ga200537, and filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the payment of 34,366,160 won paid to the 11st C hotel workers, including E, in subrogation of the Plaintiff, and delayed payment damages.

On September 6, 2012, the above court rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff (the defendant in this case), and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 4, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the debtor's rehabilitation and bankruptcy.

arrow