1. The defendant is the defendant's "amount claimed by the selected parties" attached to the plaintiff (appointed parties) and the selected parties.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The facts that the Plaintiff (appointed party; hereinafter only referred to as the “Plaintiff”) and the designated parties worked in C Hospital operated by the Defendant for the pertinent period indicated in the “date of work” column in the attached Form “amount claimed by the appointed parties” and the Defendant did not pay each of the money indicated in the “amount claimed by the appointed parties” column in the attached Form “amount claimed by the appointed parties” from March 1, 2019 to the retirement and retirement allowances from March 1, 2019, are not disputed between the parties or can be acknowledged by the statement in the attached Form A No. 1.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay each of the money stated in the "claim amount" column in the attached Form, which is the unpaid wages and retirement allowances, to the plaintiff and the selected parties, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from May 18, 2019 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the 14th day after the retirement date of the plaintiff and the selected parties.

B. In this regard, the Defendant received a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures by the Changwon District Court 2019dan1010, Apr. 8, 2019. The Defendant asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff’s wage and retirement allowance claims of the Plaintiff and the designated parties are expected to be confirmed as public-interest claims under the above rehabilitation procedures, and thus, they cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim. However, the Plaintiff’s wage and retirement allowance claims of the designated parties constitute public-interest claims under Article 179(1)10 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, and can be paid from the obligor from time to time without resorting to rehabilitation procedures. According to the evidence No. 2 of the above rehabilitation procedures, the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion is rejected.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition by admitting all of the claims.