logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.17 2016가단31822
임금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

가. 원고는 피고의 계약 직원으로 피고의 시설 및 관리 업무를 맡아 2010. 9. 1.∽2013. 12. 31. 근무한 후 퇴직하였고, 2014. 1. 1.∽2016. 3. 4. 피고 부설 어린이집의 운전자로 근무하였다.

B. As for November 201, the Plaintiff received KRW 1,50,000 per month from the Defendant, KRW 1,650,00 per month from December 201 to December 2012, and KRW 1,750,00 per month from January 2013 to December 2013, respectively.

B. The Defendant’s pastors, assistant pastors, Jeondogs, and full-time employees were paid a bonus of 150% or 100% of the principal salary every three months according to the class.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Defendant had a benefit system that pays bonuses every three months to all employees who conduct general management affairs.

Around October 2012, C promised to pay the bonus to C, which is the head of the fiscal division and the head of the defendant's fiscal division, because the Plaintiff did not pay the bonus at all.

The plaintiff seeks payment of bonuses from the amount stated in the claim, which is calculated on the basis of the benefits received while working for the defendant.

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion on the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 is insufficient to admit the Plaintiff’s above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to the above adopted evidence and witness D’s testimony, the Plaintiff is determined as a contracting employee by the annual salary system with no bonus from the time of employment as an employee, and the Plaintiff started to work as an employee in other extraordinary civil service, and the fact that bonuses have not been paid to former employees, etc. is recognized.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow