The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. As to ordinary wages such as regular bonuses

A. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s regular bonus, food allowance, personal pension subsidy, and food allowance that the Defendant paid to the Plaintiffs according to collective agreement and agreement between labor and management constituted ordinary wages on the grounds that the Defendant’s regular and uniform basis was paid as the price for contractual work.

B. Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s determination is justifiable and did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the scope of ordinary wages, contrary to what is alleged in the

2. As to the validity of the agreement to guarantee working hours

A. As to the Plaintiffs who agreed with the Defendant to consider working hours as extension, night, and holiday working hours without relation to actual extension, night, and holiday working hours, the lower court determined that it is not allowed to dispute the working hours on the ground that the Defendant falls short of the actual working hours agreed, and calculated additional statutory allowances based on the working hours under an agreement.

B. Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s determination is justifiable and did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the time-off agreement or time-off agreement.

3. As to whether the claim for additional statutory allowances violates the good faith principle

A. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s defense of good faith, on the grounds that it is difficult to readily conclude that a regular bonus, including ordinary wages, is a financial burden experienced by the Defendant due to the payment of an additional statutory allowance, or the aggravation of management status, may cause serious managerial difficulties to the extent that the Defendant is unable to cope with or may endanger the Defendant’s existence.

B. Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s determination is justifiable and did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the principle of good faith or incomplete hearing.

4. Therefore, all appeals are to be filed.