A. The meaning of an employer who bears the duty to prepare and report rules of employment under Articles 94 and 111 of the Labor Standards Act

B. Whether the representative of a local medical insurance association has a duty to prepare and report rules of employment (negative)

(a) An employer who is obligated to prepare and report rules of employment pursuant to Articles 94 and 111 of the Labor Standards Act refers to an employer who has substantive authority and responsibilities with regard to matters that constitute the contents of rules of employment, such as the determination or implementation of workplace regulations or working conditions;

B. In light of Article 25 of the Medical Insurance Act and Article 13-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the specific contents of the “regional medical insurance management regulations”, which are the established rules of the Ministry of Health and Welfare established based on Article 13-2 of the same Act, include most of the necessary matters to be stated in the rules of employment as stipulated in Article 94 of the Labor Standards Act, it constitutes the rules of employment actually applicable to the pertinent regional medical insurance association, and thus, the representative of the relevant regional medical insurance association does not have the substantive authority and responsibility to separately prepare and report the rules of employment as stipulated in the above Act, and therefore, even if such measures were decided,

(a)Articles 111 and 94 of the Labor Standards Act. Article 25 of the Medical Insurance Act, Article 13-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, Articles 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Operation of Regional Medical Insurance Associations (Rules No. 577 of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 1990, Apr. 190)

A

A co-inspector;

Attorney B

Changwon District Court Decision 91No255 delivered on August 14, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to Articles 94 and 111 of the Labor Standards Act, an employer who employs not less than 10 full-time workers imposes a duty to prepare and report rules with specific provisions concerning workplace regulations or working conditions, and punish an employer who violates them. However, an employer who is obligated to prepare and report rules of employment and a duty to report refers to an employer who has substantial authority and responsibility for matters that constitute the contents of the rules of employment, such as workplace regulations or decision or implementation of working conditions.

However, Article 25 of the Medical Insurance Act provides that matters concerning the organization, management, and operation of the medical insurance association established under the above Act shall be prescribed by the Presidential Decree. Article 13-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that the above association shall establish operating regulations concerning the organization, personnel affairs, remuneration, and accounting as prescribed by the Minister of Health and Welfare. Based on this provision, the Minister of Health and Welfare, as an established rules, requires each regional medical insurance association to accept and apply them uniformly. In light of the fact that the specific contents of the above operating regulations include most of the necessary matters concerning the rules of employment under Article 94 of the Labor Standards Act, this is actually applicable to the rules of employment applicable to the relevant regional medical insurance association. Accordingly, the representative of the above regional medical insurance association cannot be deemed to have the substantial authority and responsibility to separately prepare and report the rules of employment under the Labor Standards Act, and therefore even if this measure is decided, it shall not be subject to criminal liability for the violation of the above Act.

In this regard, the court below is justified in maintaining the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted the defendant, who is the representative director of a regional medical insurance association, on the ground that the defendant does not constitute an offense violating the duty to report and preparing the rules of employment, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles like the theory of lawsuit.

There is no reason to discuss this issue.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.