The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant managed D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), but E and F did not work for D.

The judgment of conviction in the first instance which recognized the worker nature of E and F is unfair by misunderstanding of facts.

B. The sentencing of the first instance court on the unfair sentencing (7 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, whether a contract constitutes a worker under the Labor Standards Act shall be determined depending on whether an employee provided labor in a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages in substance rather than whether the contract is an employment contract or a contract for work. Whether there is a subordinate relationship as seen above shall be determined by the employer’s contents of work, and whether the employer has a considerable direction and supervision in the process of performing work under the rules of employment or employment regulations, etc., whether the employer is designated working hours and working place, whether the employer is bound by the employer, whether the employer is capable of operating his/her business on his/her own account, such as the purchase of equipment, raw materials, working tools, etc. or the employment of a third party, and whether the risks, such as the creation of profit and loss, etc. through the provision of labor, whether the nature of remuneration was the object of work, whether the basic wage or fixed wage has been determined, whether or not the continued provision of labor relations and the degree thereof, and whether the status of the employee was recognized as a social security system, etc.