Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the victims of the misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles were real estate telecomter and were not workers under the Labor Standards Act, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of judgment.

B. The Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing by the lower court (a fine of 6 million won) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (i) Determination of the mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine regarding the defendant's assertion of labor should be made based on whether the form of a contract is an employment contract or a contract for employment, and whether a worker has a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages in substance. Whether there is a subordinate relationship with the above mentioned above shall be determined by the employer and shall be subject to the rules of employment or the rules of employment, and whether the employer has considerable direction and supervision in the course of performing the work, whether the employer is designated work hours and work place, whether the worker is detained, whether the employer is allowed to operate the business on his/her own account, whether the labor provider has no risk, such as the creation of profit from the provision of labor, and the occurrence of loss, whether the nature of remuneration is the subject of the labor, whether the nature of remuneration was determined by the basic salary or fixed wage has been determined, whether the continuous provision of the labor relationship and the exclusiveness and degree of the employment relationship, and whether the social security system is recognized as an employee.