The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) although the instant worker D does not fall under “one-time worker who has been employed for three consecutive months,” and does not fall under “the person who has not worked for three consecutive months,” the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the instant facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the

2. In full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, the employment of 60,000 won per day to the “C” operated by the Defendant on November 10, 2016, and the Defendant and D’s labor relations, etc., as a whole, D constitutes “one-time worker who has been employed for three consecutive months” under Article 35 subparag. 1 of the Labor Standards Act at the time of November 30, 2016, and Article 26 of the Labor Standards Act regarding pre-employment is not applicable, and thus, the prosecutor’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.