The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The Defendant asserted misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (hereinafter “instant key issue period”) was not the employer of the employees indicated in the facts charged in the instant case (hereinafter “victims”) from March 6, 2018 to March 8, 2018, and did not recognize the employees who were victimized workers. As such, the Defendant was not liable to pay the instant wage to the victimized workers, and the Defendant did not have the intent to pay the said wage to the victimized workers.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, inasmuch as the Defendant was the employer of the victimized worker during the key period of this case, and the Defendant also knew of this fact, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the

B. The lower court’s sentence on the ground of unreasonable sentencing (1.5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the following facts are acknowledged. ① The Defendant Company C (hereinafter “C”) operated by the Defendant.

around December 5, 2017, P Co., Ltd. (Co., Ltd. prior to the change; hereinafter referred to as “O”)

from the Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Construction Site for the third floor E-building (hereinafter “D”)

(2) C during D Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Corporation”).

R Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “R”) operated by Q Q.

(2) The lower court’s judgment based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court in detail over the fourth to eight pages of the lower judgment. Comprehensively taking account of the facts and circumstances, Q was the employer of the victimized worker during the key issue period, and the Defendant also did not have to do so.