The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal doctrine 1) The Defendant’s notice of dismissal was given to B on September 6, 2016, and the Defendant dismissed on October 24, 2016, in compliance with Article 26 of the Labor Standards Act regarding the pre-determination of dismissal (hereinafter “Act”). ② Even if not, B constitutes a worker under probation under Article 35 subparag. 5 of the Act, which is the subject of the exception to the application of the pre-determination dismissal, and ③ B does not apply under the proviso of Article 26 of the Act by intentionally impairing the Defendant’s business or causing property damage.

2) Since the Defendant and B agreed to receive 70% of the monthly wage between the first three months, the Defendant did not have been in arrears with wages.

B. A person who submitted a statement of reasons for an unfair appeal for sentencing may withdraw part of the reasons for appeal specified in the reasons for appeal at the trial at the appellate court’s first trial date, but may be subject to restrictions that would no longer serve as the reasons for appeal once the reasons for appeal are withdrawn. Thus, the withdrawal of reasons for appeal must be made clearly (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2010Do15130, Feb. 24, 201; 2002Do6834, Feb. 26, 2003). On Nov. 20, 2017, the Defendant made an unfair argument other than misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles in the reasons for appeal, and at the first trial at the trial date at the trial at the trial at the trial of the appellate court, the Defendant stated the summary of the reasons for appeal that “the Defendant appealed on the ground of misunderstanding of legal principles and mistake,” but according to the above legal principles, the Defendant’s statement at the first trial at the trial court at the first instance of the trial alone alone alone alone alone alone alone clearly asserted the Defendant’s argument that the aforementioned part of sentencing was legitimate.

The punishment of the court below (700,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination of the misapprehension of the legal doctrine and mistake of the unpaid payment of advance payment for dismissal is made.