The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, based on its reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s provision on remuneration and the enforcement rule on the remuneration regulations amended on January 13, 2012, were retroactively applied from December 16, 2010 in accordance with the enforcement date of Article 1 of the Addenda thereto, and that the same applies to the portion of the revised remuneration regulations and the basic bonus in the enforcement rule on the remuneration regulations.

The judgment below

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the interpretation of the regulations on remuneration and the enforcement rules on remuneration, incomplete hearing,

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, this part of the ground of appeal is with respect to the lower court’s assumptive judgment, which premised on the premise that the basic bonus part among the amended remuneration regulations and the enforcement rules of the remuneration regulations does

However, as seen earlier, insofar as the lower court’s determination that the basic bonus portion among the amended remuneration regulations and the enforcement rules of the remuneration regulations is reasonable retroactively applies is justifiable, the propriety of such assumptive judgment may not affect the conclusion of the judgment.

This part of the grounds of appeal cannot be accepted.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.