It is confirmed that there is no wage obligation such as retirement allowance against the defendant.

The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs the taxi passenger transportation business.

On April 1, 2015, the Defendant joined the Plaintiff Company and retired on March 31, 2019.

B. On April 14, 2019, the Defendant received 4,501,900 won as retirement allowances (hereinafter “instant retirement allowances”) from the Plaintiff, who wishes to receive retirement allowances in cash directly.

The retirement allowance of this case is the amount calculated by calculating the retirement allowance for the defendant's service period as KRW 4,536,173 and deducting the total of KRW 34,220 from the above KRW 4,536,173 as income tax and resident tax.

C. The Defendant promised not to raise any objection against D, while receiving the instant retirement allowance from the Plaintiff.

The defendant filed a petition with the representative C for violating the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits, but the representative of the plaintiff was subject to the disposition on October 26, 2020.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The defendant asserts that, if the defendant included bonus and unpaid annual allowance, the retirement allowance to be received by the defendant is KRW 6,941,200, and since the plaintiff paid only the instant retirement allowance of KRW 4,501,90, the defendant should receive the retirement allowance of KRW 2,439,300.

In this regard, the plaintiff asserts that there is no longer no retirement allowance obligation against the defendant due to the payment of the retirement allowance in this case.

B. 1) In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of a pecuniary obligation, if the Plaintiff, who is the debtor, denies the fact that the cause of the obligation occurred by specifying a claim first, the Defendant, as the creditor, bears the burden of asserting and supporting the fact that the legal relationship is required (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da45259, Mar. 13, 1998). 2), in light of the above legal principles, the Defendant should prove that there are many retirement allowances, etc. that the Defendant would receive from the Plaintiff rather than

However, as alleged by the defendant, the defendant is entitled to retirement pay.