All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. Even if the average wage was calculated for the part of the period for calculating the average wage in accordance with the principles stipulated in the Labor Standards Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Labor Standards Act, there was a change in the amount of wage due to special and unexpected circumstances that may lead to the worker’s retirement for a certain period of time, and thus, in such exceptional cases where it is deemed that the average wage calculated as above is considerably less or more reasonable than ordinary cases when comprehensively assessing all the circumstances, including the entire period of employment, the length of a certain period during which the amount of wage changes, the amount of wage changes, and the degree of changes in the amount of wage, etc., the calculation of the amount of retirement allowance based on such basis is not permissible in light of the spirit of the Labor Standards Act in which the employee intends to calculate the amount of retirement allowance based on the ordinary wage

However, in a case where the average wage of an employee does not reach an exceptional level that is significantly less or more than an ordinary case as above, the average wage should be calculated in accordance with the principle of the Labor Standards Act, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da99396 Decided April 15, 2010, etc.). The lower court deemed that there exists a difference between the Plaintiffs’ average wage and the average wage calculated from the date of the lock-out immediately preceding the lock-out to the date of each disciplinary measure against the Plaintiffs during the three-month period from the date of the lock-out to the date of termination of the lock-out, and the corresponding ratio in [Attachment 3-2]’s “average wage comparison” in the attached Table of the lower judgment, but it is insufficient to recognize that the difference between the above ratio and the average wage is to