beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 104,446,260 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from December 3, 2013 to September 16, 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a corporation entrusted with the authority of the Minister of Employment and Labor to make a substitute payment under the Wage Claim Guarantee Act pursuant to Article 27 of the Wage Claim Guarantee Act and Article 24(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.
B. The Defendant is a corporation that has been engaged in the business of developing semiconductor equipment and automatic control devices in Seoan-gu B 104 in Seoan-gu, Seoan-si, and was closed ex officio on December 31, 2012 due to business deterioration. On November 26, 2013, the Defendant was notified of the fact-finding under Article 7(1)3 of the Wage Claim Guarantee Act and Article 5(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act by the Seoan-gu Office of the Daejeon Regional Employment and Labor Agency.
C. On December 3, 2013, pursuant to the Wage Claim Guarantee Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the Plaintiff provided labor to the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant, but paid KRW 105,946,260, which is part of the wages for the last three months and the retirement allowances for the last three years (hereinafter “substitute payment”), as stated in the attached Table “substitute payment” column, to 27 persons, such as C, etc. (hereinafter the above workers were referred to as “attached workers”) retired from office, etc.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 8, Eul evidence 2, the purport of whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Determination on the cause of a claim 1) The Plaintiff paid a substitute payment to the employees other than the employees in attached Form 12 (A) as stated in the attached Table “repaid substitute payment” to the said employees, as seen earlier. Therefore, the Plaintiff may subrogate the Defendant’s right to claim the unpaid wages, etc. to the extent of the substitute payment made to the said employees pursuant to Article 8(1) of the Wage Claim Guarantee Act.
I would like to say.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a substitute payment and damages for delay that the plaintiff paid to the above worker.
B. As to this, the defendant did not have worked for the defendant company in attached Form 22, and attached Form 2 and 2.