1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. The plaintiffs asserted that, since they provided labor at the defendant's workplace from November 1, 201, from April 11, 201, from September 201, and from September 25, 2013 to July 4, 2014, the defendant asserts that the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiffs each money and its delay damages stated in the purport of the claim as wages, annual allowances, and retirement allowances, from September 25, 2013 to July 4, 2014.

2. Determination of whether a person is a worker under the Labor Standards Act ought to be made according to whether a person actually provided labor to an employer for the purpose of wages irrespective of the form of the contract.

Whether an employer has a subordinate relationship shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the economic and social conditions of both parties, such as (i) whether an employer determines the content of work and (ii) whether an employer is subject to rules of employment or rules of service; (iii) whether an employer is subject to rules of employment or rules of service; (iv) whether an employer is subject to such designation; (v) whether an employee is capable of operating his/her business on his/her own account on his/her own account, such as ownership of equipment, raw materials, working tools, etc.; (v) whether a labor provider has a risk, such as creation of profit and loss through provision of work; (vi) whether the nature of remuneration is the subject of work; (vi) whether the nature of remuneration is determined; (iii) whether the continuous performance of provision of work and the exclusive nature of the employer; (vii) whether the employment income tax was withheld; and (viii) whether the status of an employee is recognized by any other Act

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da86769, Oct. 15, 2015; Supreme Court Decision 2004Da29736, Dec. 7, 2006). We examine the following: (a) Nos. 8, 9, and Nos. 1 and 2; (b) witness E’s testimony; and (c) this Court’s testimony.