1. The defendant,

A. The pertinent money in the “amount of figures” column in the attached Form 1 sheet to Plaintiffs A, B, D, E, F, G, and H, respectively; and

1. Under the Act on the Use and Protection of Credit Information, the Defendant, as a company primarily engaged in debt collection and credit investigation business with permission from the Financial Services Commission, concluded an entrustment contract between the Defendant and the Defendant for debt collection (hereinafter “instant entrustment contract”), and the Plaintiffs, in the attached Form 2 retirement allowance calculation table, retired from the last day of each service period while taking charge of debt management and collection during each service period indicated in the “service period.”

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 3 (if there are virtual numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul's 6 and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiffs asserted that they were employed by the defendant through the consignment contract form, but they correspond to workers under the Labor Standards Act who provided labor in a subordinate relationship to the defendant, and thus, the defendant is obligated to pay legal retirement allowances and damages for delay corresponding to each service period in accordance with the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act.

B. The Defendant’s assertion concluded an entrustment contract with the Defendant. In fact, the Defendant did not direct and supervise the Plaintiffs in a subordinate relationship, other than interference within the necessary scope for claims collection activities in accordance with the statutory regulations. The Plaintiffs performed their duties independently and independently.

The fees received by the plaintiffs shall not be the remuneration for labor, but the remuneration for the performance of the delegated work.

Therefore, since the plaintiffs cannot be viewed as an employee under the Labor Standards Act who provided their labor in a subordinate relationship with the defendant for the purpose of wages, the defendant is not obligated to pay retirement allowances

3. Whether the plaintiffs are workers under the Labor Standards Act

A. Whether a person constitutes a worker under the relevant legal doctrine is the form of a contract.