logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2020.12.24 2018다298775
임금
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Whether a worker is a worker under the Labor Standards Act should be determined in accordance with whether a worker provided labor in a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages in a business or workplace, rather than in the form of a contract.

In this context, whether an employer is a subordinate relationship should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following economic and social conditions: (a) whether the employer determines the content of the work; (b) whether the employer is obliged to direct and supervise the work hours and the place of work; (c) whether the employer is bound by the employer; (d) whether the employer is capable of operating his/her business on his/her own account; (e) whether the employer voluntarily owns equipment, raw materials, work tools, etc.; (e) whether the employer has a risk, such as creation of profit and loss from the provision of labor; (e) whether the nature of remuneration is the subject of the work itself; (e) whether the basic pay or fixed pay was determined; (e) whether the employer has continued to provide labor; and (e) whether the employer has exclusive responsibility for the employer; and (e

(See Supreme Court Decision 2012Da20550 Decided July 9, 2015, etc.). Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court determined that: (a) the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”; (b) entered into a commission contract with the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”); and (c) performed the business of soliciting the Defendant to enter into an insurance contract by putting customer into a customer information database using the customer information database; and (d) provided labor with a subordinate relationship with the Defendant for the purpose of wages; and (b) based on such premise, it does not constitute a worker subject to the application of the Labor Standards Act.

arrow