logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 포항지원 2018.03.22 2016가단9160
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) is a corporation whose purpose is construction business, etc. and Defendant C is the representative director of D.

B. Defendant B, around October 201, delegated all the construction authority pertaining to the instant construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) and commenced management at the said construction site from November 201, 201.

C. Upon Defendant B’s request, the Plaintiff worked for the position of the head of the management department from January 2012 to the instant construction site.

D An application for rehabilitation was filed with the Daegu District Court (2013 Gohap16) on March 21, 2013, but the said court rendered a decision to discontinue rehabilitation procedures on November 19, 2013.

E. On February 4, 2015, Defendant C was sentenced to a suspended sentence for the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the Act on the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits due to the following criminal facts from the Daegu District Court’s Port Branch (No. 2014Kadan1277). The said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

Defendant

C A, a person who was working as the representative director of the FD located in South-gu, South-gu, as at the time of port of port, was working for the said company and did not pay 60,393,880 won in total and 7,008,430 won in retirement pay of Plaintiff A, who retired on December 1, 2013, and 14 days after the date of his retirement.

F. Defendant B returned to Korea from its branch offices, which are the instant construction site, around November 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 10, 11, 12, 17, 18, Eul 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. Defendant B’s assertion was difficult to operate the instant construction site due to the shortage of funds while receiving a subcontract for the instant construction project from D.

Defendant B left Korea without notifying the Plaintiff of the abolition of the rehabilitation, and sent KRW 20 million for emergency funds to Korea, and had the Plaintiff operate the construction site of this case by inserting KRW 200 million.

However, branch offices are local.

arrow