1. The Defendants jointly share the Plaintiff A with KRW 22,752,670, and the Plaintiff B with respect to KRW 8,139,695, and each of the said money.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiffs and the defendants are married with each other, and the plaintiff A and the defendant C are married with each other.

B. On July 25, 1999, Defendant D registered business with the trade name “E” and started its business around that time, and Defendant C also actually operated the above business.

C. Plaintiff A worked as an employee of the said “E” between September 1, 2006 and July 30, 2015; Plaintiff B served as an employee of the said “E” from June 20, 2011 to July 30, 2015.

Plaintiff

A’s retirement allowances during the above period are KRW 22,752,670, and Plaintiff B’s retirement allowances during the above period are KRW 8,139,695.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-2 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are obligated to pay the retirement allowance of 22,752,670 won and damages for delay accrued to the plaintiff A as the representative who actually operated the "E", and the retirement allowance of 8,139,695 won and damages for delay accrued to the plaintiff B, barring any special circumstance.

B. The Defendants’ assertion (1) argues to the effect that Defendant D is the nominal owner in his business registration, and was not involved in the actual operation of “E”. However, in full view of the following circumstances, including: (a) Defendant D’s business registration with the trade name of “E” and the entire purport of the arguments; (b) Defendant C also engaged in cosmetics and retail business since around 2006; (c) there was no evidence or material to deem that Defendant C was subject to a business registration transfer from Defendant D; and (d) there was no evidence or material to deem that Defendant C merely lent the business registration of “E” from Defendant D, the above assertion by Defendant D is without merit.

(2) The Defendants directly bring the Plaintiffs’ benefits out of the cash sales of the “E”.