logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.08 2016나13931
연차수당
Text

1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. After concluding a B apartment management office and security service contract, the Defendant continuously concluded a contract with the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) for the security service by setting the contract period from March 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013; ② from January 1, 2014 to February 28, 2014; ③ from March 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014; and ③ from March 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014.

According to a labor contract, the Plaintiffs were dismissed after having worked from March 1, 2013 to December 31, 2014.

B. The Defendant concluded a retirement pension contract with Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd. for the payment of retirement allowances and annual leave allowances to the Plaintiffs. Accordingly, the Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd. paid the Plaintiffs KRW 1,945,032 under the pretext of retirement allowances and annual leave allowances for the period of service for the first year from March 1, 2013 to February 28, 2014 (i.e., retirement allowances of KRW 1,947,036 annual leave allowances of KRW 597,96), respectively, on March 19, 2014; and (ii) “from March 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014” paid KRW 1,191,780 under the pretext of retirement allowances for the period of service for ten months.

C. Article 7 of the labor contract concluded between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant regarding the period from March 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014 provides that “Holidays and vacations shall be governed by the Labor Standards Act and labor-related Acts and subordinate statutes.”

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1 and 4, the entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiffs asserted that they continued to work without using leave from March 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014. The Defendant was paid money from the B apartment management office as annual leave allowances to the Plaintiffs. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay annual leave allowances to the Plaintiffs during the said period.

3. Determination

(a) The annual leave under Article 60 of the Labor Standards Act is for one year’s work;

arrow