1. The part against the plaintiff falling under any of the following subparagraphs among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked:

The defendant on 2010.

1. The court's explanation concerning this part of the reasons for the disposition is the same as the corresponding part of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the reasons are cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the

(hereinafter referred to as the above, it is indicated only as “the same as the entries in the judgment of the court of first instance”. 2. Whether the instant disposition was lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is stated in the judgment of the first instance court.

(b) Entry in the judgment of the first instance under relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. 1) Determination of the first argument is based on the following: the instant remedy order, the process of proceeding, and the instant remedy order for the succession of defects are fair until the order is revoked by a disposition agency or a court or other competent agency as an administrative act.

On the other hand, where prior dispositions and subsequent dispositions are made continuously and continuously for the purpose of separate legal effects and are unable to dispute the validity of the prior dispositions due to the lack of dispute, the validity of the subsequent dispositions can only be asserted on the grounds of defects of the prior dispositions only when the defects of the prior dispositions are grave and obvious.

Therefore, even if the defects of the order for remedy of this case already confirmed are illegal, the disposition of this case, which was taken in accordance with the fact that it did not comply with the order for remedy of this case, is unlawful, unless it is serious and clear, and thus, it does not constitute an invalidation.

B) On the ground of the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant remedy order is not a plaintiff’s employee, and that the instant disposition of suspension of work on board constitutes a legitimate order of work, whether the instant remedy order is automatically null and void (whether it constitutes a worker under the Labor Standards Act is an employment contract or a contract of work), and is in substance subordinate relationship to the employee’s business or workplace for the purpose of wages.