1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is employed by the defendant and is in charge of construction management.

October 17, 2018.

B. Although the Plaintiff retired as above, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff wages of 1.240,000 won on October 2018.

C. The Defendant’s representative C was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million (Seoul Southern District Court 2020 high-level 1006 violation of the Labor Standards Act, etc.) due to criminal facts, such as that the Plaintiff’s wages of KRW 1,240,00 against the Plaintiff was not paid within 14 days from the date of retirement without any agreement on the extension of the due date between the parties. The above order became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid wages of 1240,000 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from November 1, 2018 to the date of full payment after 14 days from the date of retirement to the date of full payment, barring special circumstances.

3. The defendant's assertion and judgment are alleged to the effect that the plaintiff could not respond to the plaintiff's claim because the plaintiff did not return the boom test equivalent to KRW 1,432,90,00. However, the evidence of the defendant's submission alone is insufficient to admit the defendant's above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In addition, even if the Defendant’s assertion appears to the effect that it offsets the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff’s wage claim by using the return claim equivalent to the test rate as the automatic claim against the Plaintiff, wages are paid in full directly to the employee in currency, so it is a principle that the employer cannot offset the employee’s wage claim against the employee’s wage claim (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Da77290, Dec. 11, 2014). Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion.