The Defendant, at the above construction site from August 1, 201 to August 12, 2011, did not pay 1,080,000 won in total for five workers within 14 days from the retirement date, which is the date on which the cause for payment occurred, as stated in the statement of unpaid money and valuables to each individual, as well as 860,000 won in August 201, 201.

2. The representative director of the judgment company externally and externally has the authority to represent the company and perform the business affairs of the company. Thus, barring any special circumstance, as a person in charge of business management under Article 15 of the Labor Standards Act, barring any special circumstance, he/she shall be deemed an employer. However, in cases where a specific person is registered only on the pretext of a wrongful purpose and does not actually perform any business affairs by excluding him/her from all business affairs of the company, the representative director shall not be deemed to be a person who represents or represents the business owner externally under comprehensive delegation of all or part of the business affairs by the business owner. Thus, it shall not be deemed to be

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do2910 delivered on January 18, 200). According to the records, the facts that the Defendant was registered as the representative director of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant Co., Ltd.”) from November 4, 2010 can be recognized. However, according to the witness H and I’s each legal statement and the statement of the police interrogation protocol against J (No. 2012 type 2394, the location of the original district prosecutor’s office), etc., the actual business owner of the instant Co., Ltd. lent only the name to J, upon the request of J, the Defendant, a real business owner.