2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

2. The reasons why the plaintiff and the designated party members asserted this part are stated are as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. The defendant's assertion

A. The substance of a contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is not an employment contract, but is close to a delegation contract, and constitutes “worker engaged in management and supervision regardless of the type of business” under Article 34 of the Enforcement Decree of the Labor Standards Act pursuant to Article 63(4) of the Labor Standards Act.

B. The plaintiff and the designated parties, as the former leader, have led the training team formation and training management of his own players for the purpose of improving his athletic ability, without any interference, and could act more freely than the players during work hours. Thus, at the time of the appointment of the former leader as the former leader, the wages are fixed at KRW 3 million per month in accordance with Article 9 (Benefits) and attached Table 1 of the former leader's Operation Guidelines, and even if the overtime training was conducted during the hours, it shall be deemed that all of them were included in the monthly salary agreed upon.

C. The Plaintiff and the designated parties were able to form a training room for 8 hours a day on their own. However, it cannot be acknowledged in the principle of good faith that the Defendant claims overtime work allowances to the Defendant after freely organizing and implementing more than her overtime lines, and it cannot be found whether such excess work was made or not, and the Defendant’s excessive work.