Defendant guilty

Even if the court below's punishment (4 million won) is too unreasonable, it is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. Considering the circumstances that D’s judgment received incentives in proportion to the sales amount, not fixed pay, and paid business income tax, and that it did not subscribe to the National Pension, Health Insurance, Employment Insurance, Industrial Accident Insurance, etc., it is reasonable to view D as constituting “worker” under the Labor Standards Act, which provided labor to the Defendant for the purpose of receiving wages, as remuneration for labor, in full view of the following circumstances:

① D is paid monthly from February 2010 to January 2013, 150,000 won each month as “fixed grade” while working as a harner at a beauty room operated by the Defendant. Since then, D received incentives, which is a certain percentage of sales thereafter, monthly payment. It seems that there was no particular change in the contents of work of D before and after that.

② The Haguers, such as D, worked from 9:30 p.m. to 30 p.m. at 9:30 p.m. during the hours of open to the beauty room.

③ D is easy once a week, and it seems that it was impossible to autonomously set the work day and the work day without a certain consultation with other hedgers, and reporting to the manager belonging to the head office or the head office, etc.

④ Although the Hague designer prepared and used the Gabro and Rabro at his personal expense, it appears to be due to the characteristics of the ladr’s business, and other surgery products or beauty art equipment, such as chrode and labroto, were used by the Defendant’s goods.

(5) Defendant.