2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant is against the confession of the crime of this case, and that the defendant is the first offender.

However, in the internal relationship between the Defendant and A, apart from who is currently liable to pay the amount below the minimum wage amount to workers H and I, it is clear that the Defendant was in the employer’s position in the relationship with the above workers in view of the labor period for which the above workers received wages below the minimum wage amount and the fact that the above workers had been employed by the Defendant, etc., and the period for which the above workers paid the amount below the minimum wage amount to the above workers is shorter, and the total amount below the minimum wage amount is not less than the minimum wage amount, and all the sentencing factors indicated in the arguments of this case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, circumstances leading to the instant crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, Article 28(1) and Article 6(1) of the Minimum Wage Act (amended by Act No. 11278, Feb. 1, 2012); Article 28 and Article 6(1) of the former Minimum Wage Act (amended by Act No. 11278, Feb. 1, 2012); Article 4 of the judgment of the court below; Article 14 and 15 of the Act shall be deleted; and Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure shall be corrected to add