The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the court's exercise of the right to request a vindication is against the principle of pleading, and the exercise of the right to request a vindication is against the principle of pleading and goes beyond the limit of the exercise of the right to request a vindication. The court's exercise of the right to request a vindication is pointed out when there is any inconsistency or uncertainty between the parties' assertion and gives an opportunity to correct or supplement it, and demands submission of evidence as to the facts at issue.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Da60759 Decided July 11, 2013. Examining the record in accordance with such legal doctrine, the lower court cannot be deemed as having a duty to conduct an examination by exercising the right of explanation as to whether the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) paid the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and oil subsidies constitute the minimum wage.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, it is difficult to see that the refund or oil subsidy claimed by the Defendant falls under the minimum wage.

Therefore, the lower judgment did not err by misapprehending the relevant legal doctrine, etc., thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court determined that the Defendant was liable to pay the Plaintiffs the minimum wage unpaid under the Minimum Wage Act on the premise that the Plaintiffs are workers.

Examining the records in accordance with the relevant legal principles, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable.

In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on workers, thereby failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by failing to exercise the right of explanation, or by omitting judgment.

3. As to the third ground for appeal, the principle of trust and good faith.