beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 10,500,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from September 1, 2016 to December 7, 2016 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff worked as an oriental medical doctor from August 5, 2013 to August 31, 2016 at the Hanwon operated by the Defendant.
The Plaintiff’s benefits are 5.5 million won per month, and the Defendant sought payment from January 2015 to August 2016 as wages of 27 million won per month (the sum of the amount below 5.5 million won per month) and retirement allowances of 16.5 million won (5 million won x 3).
2. Determination
A. According to each of the evidence Nos. 2, 3-1 through 3, and 2, it is recognized that the Plaintiff received money of KRW 1.5 million through KRW 5.5 million each month from September 2013 to July 2016 from the Plaintiff’s members of the Han-gu Council operated by the Defendant.
However, the fact that there was a month in which 5.5 million won was deposited, it is not sufficient to recognize that part of the salary was unpaid in the month in which the monthly salary of the Plaintiff was paid in the amount of less than 5.5 million won, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.
In addition, it is difficult to recognize that there is no money deposited from the defendant on August 2016 because the plaintiff's accurate time of retirement is difficult to understand.
Therefore, the part of the Plaintiff’s claim for wages is without merit.
B. Although the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff would not receive retirement allowances, the Defendant’s waiver of all or part of the retirement allowances before the occurrence of the retirement allowances claim is null and void as it violates the retirement allowances rules, which are mandatory provisions.
The Plaintiff’s continuous employment year is about three years, and the average wage for 30 days as of the time of retirement is about 3.5 million won (as stated in evidence A 3-1, each KRW 3.5 million was deposited into the Plaintiff’s side account on June 30, 2016, and July 30, 2016). Therefore, the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff from September 1, 2016 to December 7, 2016, which is the delivery date of a copy of the complaint in this case.