The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court held that the Plaintiffs’ assertion that holiday work hours should be paid in duplicate with 150% of holiday work allowances and 50% of overtime work allowances exceeding 40 hours per week, on the ground that the Plaintiffs’ holiday work hours exceeded 40 hours per week, and that the Plaintiffs’ premium pay for holiday work hours should be paid in parallel, on the ground that the Plaintiffs’ holiday work hours exceeded 40 hours per week.

(2) However, it is difficult to accept the above determination by the lower court for the following reasons.

The hours of holiday work under the former Labor Standards Act (amended by Act No. 15513, Mar. 20, 2018; hereinafter “former Labor Standards Act”) shall be deemed not to be included in the standard hours per week and overtime hours per week. As such, premium pay for holiday work and overtime work cannot be paid in duplicate.

(2) The lower court erred by misapprehending the meaning of “one week” as stipulated in Articles 50 and 53 of the former Labor Standards Act, and the legal doctrine on the payment of respective premium pay for holiday work and overtime work, in so determining, contrary to what is alleged in the ground of appeal, the lower court erred by misapprehending the meaning of “one week” as stipulated in Articles 50 and 53 of the former Labor Standards Act, and by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the payment of premium pay for holiday work and overtime work.

2. Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remainder of the grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices