1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 1, the following facts are recognized.

1) The Defendant is a Hyundai Motor Vehicle Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Modern Motor Vehicle”).

(2) The term “non-regular car sub-chapters” refers to the term “non-regular car sub-chapters” (hereinafter referred to as the “non-regular sub-chapters”) consisting of workers belonging to the subcontractor and workers belonging to the company.

A) Around October 2010, the Plaintiff is a member of the Plaintiff’s association. (2) Around October 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract on the delegation of a lawsuit with respect to the first, second, and third instance courts (hereinafter “instant contract on the delegation of a lawsuit”). The Plaintiff’s success fee of KRW 500,000 (including value-added tax) with the Defendant as “3% of the economic gains derived from a lawsuit in the event that the delegated business is successful through a judgment, judicial or extra-judicial reconciliation, conciliation, etc. (excluding value-added tax) and KRW 50,000 (excluding value-added tax).”

3) The Plaintiff, on behalf of the Defendant, filed a lawsuit against the Seoul Central District Court to verify the status of modern automobiles, and the Seoul Central District Court rendered a judgment in favor of the Defendant on September 18, 2014 that “The Defendant confirmed that he is an employee of modern automobiles, and Hyundai Motor is paying KRW 49,864,546, and damages for delay therefrom,” (Seoul Central District Court 2010Kahap112450).

(4) On March 2016, where the appellate court had been pending in each of the instant cases, Hyundai Motor was a non-regular branch and a settlement other than judicial matters. The Defendant withdrawn the said lawsuit following a settlement other than the above, and was employed as a full-time employee of Hyundai Motor.

B. According to the above facts, the defendant is employed as a full-time employee of modern automobiles through reconciliation, and the conditions for the payment of the contingent remuneration stipulated in the contract of this case are stipulated in the contract of this case.