1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 15,18,863 against the Plaintiff and its related thereto from August 3, 2017 to October 4, 2019 against the Defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a company running taxi transport business, and the Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant from July 1, 2009 to July 19, 2017 and served as a taxi engineer.

B. On September 14, 2017, the Defendant calculated excess transport earnings without including them in the average wage, which is the basis for calculating retirement allowances, and paid the Plaintiff KRW 10,974,500 as retirement allowances.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4-15, Eul evidence 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is liable to pay the Plaintiff the remaining retirement allowance of KRW 15,405,719, which is calculated by deducting the Defendant’s retirement allowance of KRW 10,974,387 from the retirement allowance of KRW 26,380,106, including excess transport earnings, from the average wage.

3. Determination

A. Whether the excess taxi earnings are included in the average wage, which serves as the basis for the calculation of retirement allowances, in a case where a worker pays the total transport earnings to the wholly transporting company, unlike the case where the worker directly reverts the excess taxi commissions to himself/herself, it shall be deemed that the transportation company may manage and control excess taxi commissions by clearly confirming and specifying the occurrence of excess taxi commissions and the scope of the amount, and thus, it shall be deemed that the transportation company may thereafter manage and control the excess taxi commissions by clearly identifying and specifying the occurrence of excess taxi commissions, and it shall not be deemed any different from the fact that the transportation company later paid to the employees the amount equivalent to the excess taxi commissions paid by the employees. Therefore, the excess of

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da25113 Decided July 12, 2007). The fact that the Defendant received total transport earnings from the Plaintiff and paid the Plaintiff the balance remaining after deducting the standard transport earnings and the amount of excess fuels used is no dispute between the parties. As such, the Defendant may clearly confirm and specify whether to generate excess transport earnings and the amount range.