The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. As to the violation of the Labor Standards Act with respect to F among the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant did not employ F as a worker; the Defendant did not commission F to work so-called so-called franchise in an independent position; paid remuneration therefor; and the unpaid remuneration remains entirely.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to 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 whether a worker has a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages at the business or workplace. Determination of whether a dependent relationship is based on the above should be made by comprehensively taking account of the following factors: (a) the employer’s contents of work are determined; (b) the employer is subject to the rules of employment or the rules of employment; (c) the employer designates working hours and working place; (d) the employer is bound by the employer; (e) whether the employer is capable of carrying on his/her business on his/her own account; (e) whether the employer is able to own equipment, raw materials or working tools; (e) whether the employer voluntarily owns any risks, such as the creation of profits and losses by providing labor; and (e) whether the nature of remuneration was the subject of the labor itself; (e) whether the basic salary or fixed wage was determined; and (e) whether the continued relationship to provide labor and exclusive employment to the employer; and (e) whether the social security system is recognized.

However, the circumstances such as whether the basic wage or fixed wage was determined, whether the labor income tax was withheld, and whether it was recognized as an employee in the social security system, etc. are economically superior.