1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked, and that part shall be revoked.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except in the following cases: (a) No. 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance, No. 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter “the judgment of the court of first instance”), and thus, (b) the same is cited by the main sentence of Article 420

The plaintiffs claim that the special holiday allowance should be calculated and paid based on ordinary wages under the Labor Standards Act because the special holiday allowance falls under the statutory allowance. The defendant asserts that the special holiday allowance falls under the agreed allowance and the special holiday allowance is valid even if it is calculated and paid differently from the labor standard law due to the labor-management agreement.

The former Labor Standards Act (amended by Act No. 15513, Mar. 20, 2018; hereinafter the same shall apply) includes not only the weekly holiday work prescribed in Article 55 of the former Labor Standards Act but also the work on the day designated by the organization agreement or the rules of employment as a holiday (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da1410, 14127, 14134, 14141, Aug. 20, 202); the former Workers’ Day Establishment Act (amended by Act No. 15513, Jan. 27, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply) as a paid holiday work.

However, the part of the paid holiday allowance, regardless of whether labor has been provided or not, shall be considered to have the nature of the agreed allowance determined by the labor-management agreement. In the payment of the agreed allowance, even if the amount of the allowance is calculated on the basis of the amount different from the ordinary wage under the Labor Standards Act due to the labor-management agreement, such agreement shall not be deemed null and void in violation of the Labor Standards Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Da6106, Jul. 26, 2012).