The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

② In addition, even if D/E is an employee under the Labor Standards Act, there is no obligation to give advance notice of dismissal or pay advance notice of dismissal in accordance with the proviso to Article 26 of the Labor Standards Act and Articles 4 and 5 and 9 of the Enforcement Rule of the Labor Standards Act, as it causes enormous impediment to Defendant Company’s business by embezzlement of public funds of C (hereinafter “Defendant Company”).

2. 1) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court as to the assertion that D and E is not an employee under the Labor Standards Act, the Defendant is sufficiently recognized as a worker D and E.

(1) The defendant prepares each labor contract in entering into a contract with D and E, each of which is specified as the user by the defendant company, D and E as the worker, and the defendant company pays D and E wages to D and E on a monthly basis, and the monthly wage includes various allowances (such as extension, night, holiday work) and annual allowances.

“Working Hours” and “Working Hours: 8 hours a day (excluding break time)” are also indicated (see, e.g., investigation records 21,69, 73 pages). The Defendant asserts that the Defendant only used the Defendant Company’s form of labor contract while entering into a supply contract with D and E labor.

However, with respect to the circumstances in which the Defendant used the form of the Defendant Company’s labor contract, the Defendant entered into the contract in the investigative agency as well as other employees in accordance with the form of the labor contract, as well as D and E.

After statement (see 15, 55 of investigation records), D and E in the case of a party.