The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

The issue of whether a contract constitutes a worker under the Labor Standards Act is a contract for employment or a contract for work, and whether a worker has a subordinate relationship with an employer for the purpose of wages at the business or workplace is determined depending on whether the employer has provided the worker with labor. The determination of whether a dependent relationship here refers to the following factors: (a) whether the employer determines the content of work and is subject to the rules of employment or the rules of employment; (b) whether the employer has a considerable direction and supervision in the process of performing work; (c) whether the employer has designated working hours and working places; (d) whether the employer is bound by the employer; (e) whether the employer is capable of operating his/her business on his/her own account; (e) whether the employer has a risk, such as the creation of profit from the provision of labor; (e) the occurrence of loss; and (e) whether the nature of remuneration is the subject of work itself; (e) whether the basic salary or fixed wage was determined; and (e) whether the employer has continued to provide labor, exclusive nature to the employer; and (e) whether the social security system is recognized.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da6998, May 14, 2009). Therefore, whether an employee is a worker in an individual case ought to vary depending on the specific facts and degree of proof.

Examining the reasoning and records of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the facts and circumstances stated in its reasoning, runs the debt collection business (Counterclaim Plaintiff, hereinafter “Defendant”).