beta
Text
1. The Daegu District Court prepared September 29, 2016, with respect to the case of the voluntary auction of real estate D in Daegu District Court Branch D.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On September 29, 2016, the above court distributed KRW 9,154,242 as the highest wage obligee against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties, and distributed KRW 1,267,069,549 as the applicant obligee and the mortgagee-mortgage-backed limited liability company under the order of 3rd priority. Defendant AB, Inc., Inc., the bankrupt bankrupt, distributed KRW 19,506,802 as the delivery authority, and the distribution schedule (hereinafter referred to as “instant distribution schedule”) was formulated in order of 139,970 won as the remaining part of the delivery authority’s port tax (national tax) and 139,970 won as the delivery authority’s port tax (local tax).
B. As to this, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) raised an objection against the Defendants against the exclusion of the dividend amount, which is the preferred wage and retirement allowance obligee E by the designated parties.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The key issue of the instant case is that the appointed party E is an employee of the company B (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and thus the right of preferential repayment should be recognized (the trustee in bankruptcy of the company B, the bankrupt of the company B, the bankruptcy of the company B, the bankruptcy of the company B, the bankrupt of the bankrupt of the company B, does not dispute the plaintiff’s assertion). The defendant Addi-backed securitization specialized in the defendant Addi-backed securitization asserted that the appointed party E cannot be an employee who was employed as a director of the company of the non-party E. In
I would like to say.
B. Determination of whether a worker is a worker subject to the Labor Standards Act, regardless of the form of a contract, shall be based on whether the worker provided labor in a subordinate relationship with the employer for the purpose of wages. In determining whether a subordinate relationship exists, the content of the work is determined by the employer.