Defendant

A. From July 18, 2017 to Plaintiff A, 34,624,308 Won and its related costs

B. Plaintiff B 38,866,251 and ..

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the defendant is a corporation operating the manufacturing industry. ② The plaintiff Gap retired on July 3, 2017 while working for the defendant on February 15, 2016. The plaintiff Eul retired on November 5, 2015. The plaintiff Eul retired on May 31, 2017. The plaintiff C was employed on March 1, 2016 and retired on July 3, 2017. The plaintiff D was employed on March 1, 2017 and retired from office on July 3, 2017. The defendant's duty to pay the plaintiff's unpaid wages to the defendant's 34,624,308, the plaintiff Gap's wages and retirement allowances to the defendant's 201, the defendant's duty to pay the plaintiff's retirement allowances to the defendant's 201, the defendant's retirement allowances paid to the defendant's 2016.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiffs cannot be viewed as a worker under the Labor Standards Act as the defendant's partner or investor. However, each statement of evidence Nos. 2 and 3 is insufficient to reverse the above fact of recognition.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims are reasonable.