1. The defendant,

A. The phrase “legal retirement allowance” in the attached Table to the remaining plaintiffs except the plaintiff C is stated respectively.

1. Basic facts are companies engaged in claims collection business, credit investigation business, credit inquiry business, etc. with the permission of the Financial Services Commission in accordance with the Use and Protection of Credit Information Act;

The Plaintiffs concluded an entrustment contract with the Defendant and set up the attached table “period of work” column of the Defendant’s respective branches or sub-branches, who were in charge of claims management and collection at each of the Defendant’s respective branches or sub-branches, and retired from the office at

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3 (including more than one number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion falls under a worker under the Labor Standards Act who actually worked in a subordinate relationship with 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 gist of the Defendant’s rebuttal 1) concluded an entrustment contract with the Defendant, and in fact, the Defendant did not instruct and supervise the Plaintiffs in a subordinate relationship with a view to lawful and efficient debt collection activities, and the Plaintiffs performed independent and autonomous duties. The Plaintiffs’ fees paid to the Plaintiffs should be deemed as compensation for the performance of delegated duties, not for labor. Therefore, the Plaintiffs’ fees cannot be deemed as a worker under the Labor Standards Act who provided labor in a subordinate relationship with the Defendant for the purpose of wages, and thus, the Defendant is not obligated to pay retirement allowances to the Plaintiffs. (2) As the Plaintiff is obligated to return the excessive fees paid by the Defendant to the Defendant in return for unjust enrichment, the Defendant is obligated to return retirement allowances to the Plaintiffs in a subordinate relationship with the Defendant. Therefore, if the Plaintiff C is recognized as the retirement allowances claims to the employees, the Defendant shall be