1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Although the Plaintiff asserted as indicated in the separate sheet, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff’s wage reduction for the Plaintiff was unilaterally made by the Defendant Company without consultation with the Plaintiff even though there was no problem in the management of the Defendant Company by itself, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, in full view of the purport of the argument in the evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff concluded a new employment contract with the Defendant Company as the reduced wage (no evidence exists to deem that the labor contract concluded as the reduced wage was forced by the Defendant), and the Plaintiff unilaterally reduced the wage against the Defendant Company’s representative director, so it can only be acknowledged that the Plaintiff received a reply that there was no suspicion of violation of the Labor Standards Act against the delayed payment of wages on the ground that the Plaintiff did not have any objective fact to deny the validity of the labor contract concluded as the reduced wage between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company, even though it was genuine to the Korea Employment and Labor Agency, and that there was no proof that the labor contract

In addition, the plaintiff argued that the defendant company promised to recover the reduced overdue wages when the business environment of the defendant company was improved at the time of the reduction of wages against the plaintiff, and therefore, the defendant company should pay the reduced overdue wages. However, there is no evidence to prove that the business environment of the defendant company has been improved.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit for further review.