logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.06.18 2014나22541
임금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From June 4, 2012 to December 7, 2013, the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with labor and retired from the D Company located in Yongcheon-si C.

B. At the time of the Plaintiff’s withdrawal, the Defendant did not pay to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to KRW 19,00,000 in total, including the amount of KRW 2,200,000 for July 7, 2013, the amount of KRW 4,000 for August 2013, 2013, the amount of KRW 4,00,000 for September 2013, 2013, the amount of KRW 4,000 for October 20, 2013, the amount of KRW 4,000 for the portion of KRW 4,00 for November 20, 2013, and the amount of KRW 80,00 for December 2, 2013.

[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, and the ground for appeal

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The plaintiff, who is employed by the defendant, provided labor to the defendant and retired from the above D Company, as above 1-B.

The defendant asserts that he did not receive wages equivalent to 19,00,000 won in total, as described in the paragraph, and sought payment of wages of 19,00,000 won and its delay damages.

As to this, the plaintiff and the defendant have adjusted to reduce wages from January 2013 to KRW 3,00,000 per month, they claim that the defendant's unpaid wages are merely KRW 8,260,000.

B. Even if the judgment is not bound by the finding of facts in a criminal trial, the fact that the criminal judgment already finalized on the same factual basis is material evidence, and thus, it cannot be acknowledged that the judgment of facts in a criminal trial cannot be adopted in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial unless there are special circumstances to the contrary.

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da24276 Decided September 30, 197 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da24276, Oct. 10, 2013). If the purport of the oral argument is added to the statement in the evidence No. 2 of subparagraph 2 of the same Article, the Defendant shall pay 2,200,000 won for July 7, 2013, and 4,000,000 won for August 2013, 2013, and 4,000,000 won for wages for September 30, 2013, and 4,000,000 won for wages for November 1, 2013, and for portion for December 1, 2013.

arrow