The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles E is registered as a director on the registry of a stock company D (hereinafter “instant company”) and actually performed its duties as an officer, and therefore, it is not an employee under the Labor Standards Act.

Even if the E constitutes a worker under the Labor Standards Act, the Defendant paid annual allowances to E, and the E received the amount equivalent to KRW 80 million accumulated by the instant company as retirement allowances.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. Determination of whether a worker is a worker under the Labor Standards Act shall be made according to whether a worker provided labor in a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages regardless of the form of a contract. Determination of whether a dependent relationship here exists shall be made by considering the contents of work determined by the employer, whether the worker is subject to the rules of employment, service rules, personnel regulations, etc., whether the worker is subject to specific and direct direction and supervision in the course of performing his/her duties, whether the remuneration has the characteristic of the worker itself, whether the wage has the characteristic of the wage per se, whether the wage has the characteristic of the wage per se, whether the labor relationship continues to provide labor and the degree and degree of exclusiveness to the employer (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Du524, May 27, 2005; 2006Da78466, May 31, 2007), as a whole, as long as it is deemed that the worker provided labor for the purpose of wages in a subordinate relationship with the employer.