A. In fact, the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, registered the medical corporation of this case as the representative of the hospital E of the D Medical Foundation, but in fact, did not take over books, etc., and thus does not constitute an employer or a person in charge of business operation under the Labor Standards Act. Therefore, there is no possibility of criticism against the violation of the Labor Standards Act.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of suspended sentence for six months of imprisonment, one hundred and twenty hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, but the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and investigated, and rejected the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion with detailed reasons for the judgment on the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion.

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the court below's determination that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is just and there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misunderstanding legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

subsection (b) of this section.

(1) While the defendant serves as the chief director at the prosecution, he/she was under overall command and supervision of workers as the chief manager of the instant hospital.

was stated.

② On June 15, 2015, the Defendant: (a) prepared and signed a letter of performance of payment to the direct workers to pay the unpaid deposits by June 19, 2015.

③ In light of the aforementioned circumstances, the Defendant’s wages to workers solely on the fact that the Defendant received benefits from a medical corporation D medical foundation as the chief director, or the competent administrative agency did not approve of the change of the chief director.