Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the premise that the comprehensive wage agreement is valid, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court determined that: (a) Defendant operation company is a game software development company; (b) Defendant operation company is the mobile planning, F is required to develop the PC; and (c) it is not easy to calculate working hours due to the need for the expertise of those workers, unlike simple labor by mobile server development; (b) it is possible to determine wages in the form of comprehensive wage not only the employer but also the employee’s demand; (c) the labor contract states the total annual salary amount and monthly salary; and (d) under the immediately below, it appears that it would have easily been known at the time of preparing the labor contract at the time of the employee’s preparation; (c) it is difficult to find that the employee’s demand for overtime allowances, such as night allowances, etc., was made to the Defendant while working in the company; and (e) it is difficult for the Defendant to recognize that the wage was determined as the comprehensive wage through the labor contract; and (e) it is difficult to find that the employee’s comprehensive wage was forced to do so in the process of developing the instant software.