The defendant shall be innocent.

The Defendant on July 17, 2017, as definition of Songpa-gu Seoul District Public Prosecutor's Office, 30 Seoul Dongbu District Public Prosecutor's Office, and the fact that C and D served as an employee of corporation E, for which the Defendant served as a representative director, the Defendant executed the Company's funds.

The Court accepted a complaint stating false facts that “the Company’s funds were embezzled by withdrawing money under the pretext of salary for C and D, which did not have been employed as the F,” and made no decision to F.

Judgment

C. We examine whether D has worked as a staff member of DBE.

“Employees”, regardless of the form of contract, whether an employee is a “employee” should be determined depending on whether an employee provided labor in a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages at a business or workplace. Determination of whether such a subordinate relationship exists should be made by comprehensively taking into account the following: (a) whether the content of work is determined by the employer; (b) whether the employee is subject to specific direction and supervision in the process of performing duties; (c) whether the employee is designated and the place of work is bound by the employer; (d) whether the employee’s replacement of work by employing a third party; (e) ownership of equipment, raw materials, working tools, etc.; (e) ownership of equipment, raw materials, work tools, etc.; (e) whether the characteristic of remuneration is determined by basic or fixed; (e) whether the nature of remuneration is subject to labor income tax; (e) whether the employer continues to provide labor; and (e) whether the status of an employee is exclusive to the employer; and (e) whether the social and economic conditions of the parties concerned (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Do4013, Apr. 2013, 2013).