logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.12.09 2015가단221612 (1)
임금
Text

1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s claim is all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry of Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 1-3 through 16, and Eul evidence 2-6:

The defendant is a company with the purpose of automobile transport service, etc., and the plaintiff and the designated parties are those who were employed in the defendant company on each relevant day specified in the "date of admission" list of "amount claimed by plaintiff" in attached Form 2 and currently serve or served as a driver belonging to the defendant company.

B. As to the wages applicable from July 1, 201 to June 30, 2012 during the period of August 19, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as “C”), the Defendant and the Electronic Labor-Management Group B (hereinafter referred to as “C”) entered the wage agreement with respect to the wages applicable from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 201 (hereinafter referred to as “the wage agreement for the year 201”); the agreement for the period from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the wage agreement for the year 2012”); the agreement for the period from October 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 as well as the agreement for the period from October 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “the wage agreement for the year 2013”); and the agreement for the period from October 13, 2014 to June 14.

2. The plaintiff and the defendant's assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant calculated the hourly ordinary wage on the basis of only the basic salary, excluding bonuses, continuous service allowances, good faith allowances, and leave allowances, when paying overtime work allowances, night work allowances, holiday work allowances, weekly leave allowances, and annual leave allowances (hereinafter collectively referred to as "legal allowances in this case") to the plaintiff and the selection, and thus, the defendant calculated the hourly ordinary wage on the basis of only the basic salary, excluding bonuses, continuous service allowances, good faith allowances, and leave allowances. Thus, the defendant included bonuses, continuous service allowances, good faith allowances, and leave allowances in ordinary wages.

arrow