Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

A. From August 15, 2015, the Plaintiff is a person running a four-day business with the trade name “C” (hereinafter “instant business”).

B. From July 1, 2017, the Defendant entered into an employment contract with the Plaintiff without an agreement for the employment period (hereinafter “instant employment contract”) and started to work in the instant enterprise.

C. On November 16, 2018, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to change the Defendant’s monthly holiday on the grounds of health.

However, the defendant rejected the same day, and notified the plaintiff that he will retire from office with text messages, and did not work from the next day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the employment contract of this case is valid until one month after the lapse of one month under Article 660(2) and (1) of the Civil Act, as the Defendant’s employment contract of this case did not set the employment period, despite the Defendant’s notice of termination on November 16, 2018, constitutes nonperformance of obligation.

In addition, since the defendant is unable to perform his duties on the grounds of health, he was aware that the plaintiff would incur damages if he left his office, and thus he intentionally left his office without permission, this constitutes a tort.

The plaintiff suffered positive damages, passive damages, and mental damages due to the defendant's default or tort. As part of them, the plaintiff sought compensation of 10,000,000 won.

3. Determination

A. According to the respective statements and arguments in subparagraphs B through 4, the Plaintiff paid wages below the minimum wage level during the Defendant’s working period, and the Defendant received a petition against the Plaintiff on November 21, 2018 on the ground that the Defendant was paid wages of the difference with the minimum wage, labor contract, etc. with the Busan Regional Employment and Labor Office, and the failure to prepare a labor contract.