1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is working for the defendant company

On December 2, 2013, the defendant retired, and the defendant did not pay wages and retirement allowances as follows:

Wages in arrears shall be wages of 2,76,440 won in July 5, 2013, 2013, wages of 2,776,440 won in August 5, 2013, wages of 4,163,350 won in September 5, 2013, October 5, 2013, wages of 4,163,350 won in November 5, 2013, wages of 4,163,350 won in November 5, 2013, wages of 4,163,350 won in December 5, 2013, wages of 2013, wages of 4,163,350 won in December 4, 2013, wages of 163, 163, 350 won in December 5, 2013, retirement allowances of 207, 2014

B. The Plaintiff filed a criminal complaint against the Defendant’s actual representative C on the grounds of the foregoing delinquency in the payment of wages and retirement allowances, and C received a summary order of KRW 5,00,000 due to a violation of the Labor Standards Act.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of wages and retirement allowances, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim was extinguished due to the completion of prescription, even if not, while arguing that the Plaintiff was not the Defendant’s employee.

On August 9, 2017, when three years have elapsed from the date of retirement of the Plaintiff, the instant lawsuit was filed, and the Plaintiff’s claim, such as retirement allowances, was extinguished by the expiration of the extinctive prescription even if it is assumed that such claim exists.

In regard to this, the plaintiff argues that since the defendant recognized his/her obligation through D, which is an employee, and agreed to allow notarial acts, this constitutes a ground for suspending extinctive prescription.

In light of the above, the recognition of the obligation, which is the cause of interruption of the extinctive prescription, is a notification of the concept that the person who is the benefit of the extinctive prescription, loses his right due to the statute of limitations, or his agent, recognizes the existence of his right. The statement of evidence No. 28 through No. 31 alone is insufficient to deem that the Defendant approved the obligation as above, and there is no other evidence to

3.2