logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.08 2014나37858
임금
Text

1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiffs provided labor to the Defendant in a subordinate relationship with the purpose of actual wages, but did not receive each wage indicated in the “total” column of the attached wage list from the Defendant, so the Defendant is liable to pay the said unpaid wages and damages for delay.

As the defendant's actual representative P promised to pay the unpaid wages to the plaintiffs on April 11, 2014, the defendant is obligated to pay the above unpaid wages and delay damages to the plaintiffs in accordance with the above agreement.

B. The Plaintiffs asserted to the effect that the Defendant is an individual entrepreneur who entered into an entrustment contract for real estate sales with the Defendant and received fees based on their performance, and that the Defendant did not constitute an employee who provided labor under the Defendant’s direction and supervision in subordinate relationship with the Defendant.

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The facts of recognition 1) Defendant is a company operating real estate sales business, etc., and the Plaintiffs worked at the workplace of the Defendant’s operation from each of the corresponding days indicated in the “Date of Withdrawal” column in the attached Table of Wages Amounted to each of the pertinent days indicated in the “Date of Withdrawal.” (2) The Defendant’s actual representative P did not pay to the Plaintiffs the wages equivalent to the amount indicated in the “total” column of the attached Table of Wages Amounting to the Plaintiffs within 14 days from the date of retirement (in the case of the Plaintiff, some of the amount is different, but this seems to be an error in calculation), which was prosecuted on April 14, 2015 and received a summary order of KRW 5,00,000 (this Court Decision 2015Da6170), and the above summary order became final and conclusive at that time.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. In the judgment of civil court, it is already finalized as to the same facts even if it is not bound by the fact-finding of the criminal trial.

arrow