logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2016. 07. 27. 선고 2016다221573 판결
(심리불속행) 채권양도의 원인이 된 채권이 임금채권이라고 하여 그 통지의 선후에 상관없이 채권양수인의 권리가 우선한다고 할 수는 없음[기각]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Daegu High Court 2015Na21883 ( March 31, 2016)

Title

(C) If a claim which is the cause of the assignment of claims is a wage claim, the right of the assignee of the claim may not be considered to take precedence over the other party regardless of the prior notice.

Summary

(C) The payment deposit in this case is valid in a case where the obligor is not aware of the obligee without fault, even if the obligor is assigned the employer’s claim in lieu of the repayment of the wage claim against the employer. The payment deposit in this case is valid in a case where the obligee cannot be known without fault.

Related statutes

Article 38 of the Labor Standards Act preferential payment for wage claims

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

The records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the grounds of appeal by the appellant are included in the grounds of appeal under each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning

Since it is deemed that there is no reason or reason, all appeals are dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the above Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

arrow