The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts, E, and F have maintained the identity of the Defendant’s work at the “D Teaching Institutes” operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “D Teaching Institutes”) and had not been directed and supervised by the Defendant, and is not an employee under the Labor Standards Act.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts should be made based on whether an employee provided labor in a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages at a business or workplace. Determination as to whether an employee is subordinate to the above mentioned above should be made by taking into account the economic and social conditions, such as the employer’s determination of the work contents and the employer’s considerable direction and supervision in the process of performing duties under the rules of employment or service regulations, etc., whether the employer is subject to the employer’s designation of work hours and work place, whether the employer is capable of operating his/her business on his/her own account, whether the labor provider is independently able to create profits and cause losses, etc., and whether the remuneration nature is the object of his/her work (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do777, Sept. 7, 2007). As long as it is recognized that the employee provided labor in a subordinate relationship with the employer for the purpose of wages, whether the employee is subject to the above provision of labor can not be deemed an employee under the Labor Standards Act (see, etc.).