beta
Text
1. As to KRW 36,700,190 and KRW 36,442,60 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from January 6, 2006 to September 30, 2015.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On June 19, 2005, the Defendant, while operating a business with the trade name “C” in the Gu, Si, Si, Gu, and Si, was in fact discontinued and discontinued the business.
B. On November 23, 2005, the Plaintiff paid 36,442,600 won in total to 11 employees, including D, etc., who are employees of the Defendant’s workplace, with the amount of wages for the last 3 months and the amount corresponding to part of the retirement allowances for the last 3 years.
C. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a payment order with the Daegu District Court Decision 2005Da3933, Daegu District Court Decision 2005. The payment order stating that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 36,442,600 and the amount of KRW 6% per annum from November 24, 2005 to January 5, 2006, and the amount of 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” was finalized on January 20, 2006.
[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. As to the cause of a claim, the Plaintiff subrogated the right of workers to claim the unpaid wages, etc. to the Defendant within the scope of the amount payable under Article 8(1) of the Wage Claim Guarantee Act. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 36,70,190 [257,590 (= principal 36,442,60 won x 36,442,600 won x 06 x 0.06 x 43 days x 43 days x 46,465 (as the Plaintiff seeks), and damages for delay from November 24, 2005 to January 5, 2006], and the principal amount of KRW 36,442,60 from January 6, 2006 to September 30, 2015; and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the following day to the date of full payment.
B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant filed an application for exemption from personal bankruptcy with the Daegu District Court for adjudication of bankruptcy and exemption from immunity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Hadan412, Apr. 12, 2015). Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim for substitute payment was exempted. 2) However, in the case of employees’ wage, retirement allowance, and accident compensation, the obligor’s rehabilitation and