1. The part against the plaintiffs in the judgment of the court of first instance, including the claim modified in the trial, is as follows.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

A. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning the instant case is next to the judgment of the first instance.

With regard to the grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs, it is identical to that of the plaintiffs in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the revision as to the grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs as stated in the following paragraph (2), and the relevant part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Part 1) The fifth part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which deleted the part of the 6th part of the 6th part of the 5th part of the 5th part of the 10th part of the 5th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 8th part of the 12th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 10th part of the 7th part of the 7th part of the 19th part of the 19th part of the 19th part of the 19th part of the 1 part.

It cannot be deemed that all the costs are paid to members working in a workplace where food is not provided, or that they are paid with benefits without an employer’s obligation to pay. In light of other payment requirements, subject matter, method of payment, and amount of payment, etc. as seen above, it is reasonable to determine that the above food costs are paid periodically, uniformly and uniformly as the price for contractual work. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion that the food costs are not wages or ordinary wages is not accepted. The Defendant’s assertion that the payment of overtime allowances is “B.......... whether the payment obligation to pay overtime allowances has occurred,” and the Defendant’s assertion that the above food costs are not wages or ordinary wages is dismissed.