beta
Text
1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) by aggregating the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment below as to the defendant's argument, and therefore, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of
[Supplementary Parts]
1. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. As to the existence of the difference in the minimum wage amounting to 773,200 won, the Defendant claimed that the Plaintiff did not actually work overtime hours, and rather, the Defendant paid 288,000 won per month for overtime hours under the Labor Standards Act even though the working hours fall short of 8 hours per hour, regardless of the fact that the working hours do not fall short of 8 hours per hour under the Labor Standards Act. Since the above overtime hours have the nature of the basic wage, the monthly wage paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant exceeds the minimum wage amount under the Minimum Wage Act, the monthly wage paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant exceeds the minimum wage amount under the Minimum Wage Act. Thus, the Defendant asserts that there is no minimum wage amount to be paid to the Plaintiff.
Even if the money was paid as overtime allowances, if it was paid periodically and uniformly regardless of whether it actually worked overtime hours, it shall be deemed wages that can be included in the calculation of the minimum wage. However, working hours under the Labor Standards Act refer to the hours during which an employee provided labor under the direction and supervision of the employer, and even if an employee was not engaged in his/her work, it does not guarantee the free use of his/her worker as a part of the working hours, and if the time was actually under the direction and supervision of the employer, it is not a time that the employee actually worked, but is included in the working hours (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da41990, Nov. 23, 2006).