2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence 1-6 and Eul evidence 1-3. From October 1, 2016 to September 10, 2018, the plaintiff was employed to work for the defendant. From October 1, 2016 to November 2017, "Cat" as "D" for the period from December 2017 to September 3, 2018, "Eat" for the period from April 2018 to September 2018; ② the defendant paid KRW 1.5 million to the plaintiff from July 1, 2013 to December 2013; KRW 1.7 million from December 2013 to December 2014; and KRW 1.7 million from December 201 to 206 per month; and KRW 1.7 million from December 2014 to 200,000 per month, respectively; and

B. The Defendant asserted to the effect that, since October 2017, the Plaintiff was de facto suspended from working in the Defendant, the Plaintiff entered into an oral contract with the Plaintiff to start the business at the conference, and that the Defendant would receive facility costs when the funeral was well operated with the Plaintiff. From November 2017, the Plaintiff provided the Plaintiff with the right to operate the “D” but did not properly operate the “D”, and that the Plaintiff was paid all the money equivalent to the amount of retirement benefits and paid. Since December 2017, the Defendant’s representative director gave the Plaintiff all the authority to operate the “D” and did not participate in the Plaintiff’s business, and the Defendant’s representative director G did not participate in the work at the Defendant again from May 2018 to September 2018, the Plaintiff did not employ the Plaintiff during the said period.

Although the defendant does not specify the period accurately, in light of the arguments in the briefs on October 15, 2019, the defendant has not specified the period accurately, in 2017.