Therefore, since only the defendants appealed against the counterclaim part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the defendants' counterclaim claim.

2. Basic facts

A. In Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, the Plaintiff is a person operating the “E” (hereinafter referred to as the “E”) which is a long-term sanatorium for older persons; Defendant B from June 22, 2016 to July 19, 2017; Defendant C served as a caregiver from July 16, 2016 to July 19, 2017.

The "Labor Type, Work Day/Holiday, Recess Hours, Recess Hours Agreement (Defendants)" refers to overtime work under the Labor Standards Act (Extension, Night, and Holiday).

The term "B (Defendants)" of a flexible work agreement shall, according to free will, be fully aware of, and agree to, the two week flexible work hours system in order to accelerate work hours under Article 51 (Flexible Work Hours System) of the Labor Standards Act.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants drafted each of the above job entry dates and each of the three times employment contracts on January 1, 2017, and March 1, 2017, respectively. The main contents of the last employment contract made on March 1, 2017 are as follows.

The monthly salary in a labor contract written on January 1, 2017, which was drafted on January 1, 2017, is identical to the total amount of wage in the form of employment, working hours, recess hours, and wage, but the monthly salary in a labor contract written on January 1, 2017, which was written on March 1, 2017, does not coincide with 1.580,000 won even though the wage in a labor contract written on March 1, 2017 is the same as that written on January 1, 2017.

Most of the labor contracts, except for those which have been entered into, are the same, and the forms of employment, working hours, recess hours, and wages are different as follows, and there is no part concerning "Flexible labor consent".

C. The Defendants are indicated in the above labor contract.