beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the defendant's incidental appeal are all dismissed.
2. Costs arising from an appeal and an incidental appeal shall be respectively.
Reasons
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: ① at the end and end of the trial of the first instance, ① “five hours a day”, “seven hours a day” and “four hours a day” of the second parallel at the end and end of the trial of the first instance, ② “one day” shall be deemed as “one week”; ② the six pages 12 and 13” (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) shall be deemed as “(including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)”; ③ the parts of the first line 10 through 15 are deleted; ④ the parts of the first line 9 to 10 through 15 are deleted; ④ the 13th line “1,56,130 won” of the first line 11 are “1,56, 150 won,” and “22,63,90 of the first line 14-26, 90, and 300 won of the first instance judgment, and each of them shall be deemed as follows:
2. Additional matters to be determined;
A. Even if the Plaintiff’s judgment on the grounds for appeal showed each entry in the evidence No. 1-2, No. 2-3, or No. 5, which was pointed out or additionally submitted at the trial, and No. 1-2, No. 2-3, or No. 5, no comprehensive wage agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was concluded.
It is insufficient to view the instant comprehensive wage agreement as null and void, and otherwise, there is no other evidence to reverse the factual recognition or judgment in the relevant cited part, and thus, the assertion on the grounds for appeal by the prior plaintiff cannot be accepted on a different premise.
B. Similar to the judgment on the grounds of the incidental appeal, there is an agreement on the actual division of retirement allowances between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, contrary to the above quoted part, even based on the respective entries of the evidence Nos. 6-2, No. 47, 49, and No. 1-2, which the Defendant pointed out in the trial of the court below.
It is difficult to view that the Plaintiff’s benefits received from the Defendant include retirement allowances.