The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant returned the excess transport earnings received from the employee again to the following month, but the said money does not correspond to the wages, and there is no fact that the Defendant agreed to pay the said money with the employee.

Therefore, the defendant did not return excess transportation earnings to the worker.

Even if wages are not paid, it shall not be deemed to have been paid.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In a case where a transportation company paid to its taxi drivers a certain amount of money calculated on the basis of the actual number of days of service each month, other than paying a certain amount of money calculated on the basis of the actual number of days of service each month, and paid to the drivers a certain amount of money after deducting a certain amount of taxi commission paid to the company, so the excess amount of taxi commission is deemed to have been paid as remuneration for work

(2) If a transport company’s employees pay total transport earnings to a transport company, unlike the case where the employees directly accrue excess taxi commissions to an individual himself/herself, it shall be deemed that the transport company may manage and control excess taxi commissions by clearly confirming and specifying the occurrence of excess taxi commissions and the scope of the amount, and it shall not be deemed that the transport company has paid to employees the amount equivalent to the excess taxi commissions paid by the employees later. Thus, the transport company’s excess taxi commissions paid by the employees shall be deemed to be included in the average wage, which serves as the basis for the calculation of the amount of retirement allowances, inasmuch as the transport company’s employees clearly identified and identified the occurrence of excess taxi commissions and the scope of the amount.

B. (Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4399 Delivered on August 23, 2002).

2. As seen earlier.