logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.02.09 2017가합111629
임금
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From July 3, 2006 to April 2015, the Plaintiff served as a medical radar in accordance with the business services agreement concluded with the Defendant, in Seoan-gu, Western-si C (hereinafter “instant boat”).

B. On April 10, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant completed the business service agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on April 1, 2015 (paragraph (1)), and the Defendant, by May 10, 2015, paid the Plaintiff KRW 20,000,00, including all money and valuables under the business service agreement, such as commission for 30 days following the notification of the termination of the business service agreement, consolation money, etc. (Paragraph (2). The Plaintiff is not entitled to any compensation other than this, and the Plaintiff is not subject to any civil, criminal and administrative objection against the issues arising in relation with the Defendant (Paragraph (3)).

(hereinafter “instant agreement”) C.

On September 1, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a petition against the Defendant on the ground that he/she did not receive retirement allowances and various allowances to the Daejeon Regional Employment and Labor Office, but the said Labor Office concluded the case on November 15, 2016 on the ground that the Defendant did not violate the law.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 3, Eul 1, 2 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. As long as the establishment of a disposition document is recognized as authentic, the existence and content of the declaration of intent must be recognized in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposition document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof that denies the contents of the statement.

If there is a dispute over the interpretation of a contract between the parties, and the interpretation of the intention of the parties indicated in the disposal document is at issue, the contents of the text, the motive and background of the agreement, the purpose to be achieved by the agreement, the genuine intention of the parties, etc. shall be comprehensively

arrow