logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.12.09 2016가단29117
임금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff (appointed party) KRW 3,383,30, KRW 6,677,420, KRW 3,899,00 to the appointed party C, and KRW 3,89,00 to the appointed party C.

Reasons

1. In full view of the overall purport of the statements and arguments by Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 as to the cause of the claim, the designated parties, including the plaintiff (designated parties, hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff"), after entering into an employment contract with the defendant, provide the defendant with labor, and the unpaid wages of the designated parties, including the plaintiff, can be acknowledged as follows.

The Defendant is obligated to pay Plaintiff 1’s unpaid wages from October 19, 2015 to March 5, 2016, 3,3830 B B 2, 2015 to October 1, 2016; 6,677,420 C C 3 from October 22, 2015 to March 6, 2016; 3,89,000 d D 4 April 19, 2015 to October 2, 2016 to March 2, 2016; 3,000, including Plaintiff 2,79,000 E 5,00 E 2, 200 to October 6, 2015 to Plaintiff 3, 205, 16, 205, 16, 205, 16, 205, 205, 16, 2016.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant asserts that it is improper for the actual operator to claim wages against the defendant even though he is not the representative director of the defendant. However, the plaintiff does not claim each of the wages against the defendant's individual representative director, but rather claims against the defendant (Dasan Co., Ltd.) who is the subject of separate rights and obligations after being separated from the representative director. Thus, the above conclusion does not affect the above conclusion solely on the ground that it is alleged by the defendant.

B. In addition, although the defendant alleged that he paid part of the above wage, there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

According to the documents attached to the defendant's reply, although it can be known that the defendant paid part of the amount to the plaintiff, in light of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 7, the amount that the defendant paid is reflected in the calculation of the accrued amount.

arrow