The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The lower court invoked the legal doctrine of the Supreme Court Decision 2012Da20048 Decided June 14, 2012 regarding the determination as to whether workers are workers prescribed by the Labor Standards Act, and determined that the principal duties of the victimized workers as the crowdfunding is to secure and allocate through events, such as trading exhibitions, etc. conducted by the Defendant (hereinafter “C”) or to provide customers with counseling and counseling services with the victimized workers individually, and on behalf of customers, they act for the customer such as reservation of wedding, purchase of mixed goods, and the selection of mail companies. During that process, the lower court instructed C to educate its employees, to manage the customer, and to negotiate with the business during the suspension of business, and to provide C with a fixed amount of time for work, such as trading hours, regardless of the number of target values of contracts, and then determined that C’s work performance and management work hours, such as providing C’s work performance and management, and that C’s work performance and supervision were to be performed.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal doctrine and the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court’s judgment, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.