The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) D is as follows: (a) around February 9, 2015, the Defendant was directly entrusted by the Defendant with the Defendant’s business (hereinafter “instant business”); and (b) it is not the Defendant’s employee.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which judged otherwise and found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in fact.

2. Determination

A. Determination of whether a worker is a worker under the Labor Standards Act shall be based on whether the form of a contract is an employment contract or a contract for employment, and in substance, whether a worker has a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages at a business or workplace. Determination of whether a worker is subordinate to the above mentioned above ought to be made by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: (a) whether the employer determines the content of work and is subject to the rules of employment or the rules of employment; (b) whether the employer designates work hours and work places; (c) whether the employer is bound by the employer; (d) whether the employer is able to operate his/her business on his/her own account; (e) whether the provider has knowledge of the risks, such as the creation of profits and losses from the provision of labor; and (e) whether the nature of remuneration was determined by the basic salary or fixed wage; (e) whether the employer has continued to provide labor relations; and (e) whether the employer has exclusive responsibility to the employer; and (e) whether the social security system is recognized as an employee.

However, the circumstances such as whether the basic or fixed pay was determined, whether the labor income tax was collected at source, and whether the social security system was recognized as an employee, etc. shall be the employer.