1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to pay wages.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) adding “the instant deferment notice” and “the instant deferment notice” under Section 19 of the fourth 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) adding “the instant revocation notice” to “the instant revocation notice” on March 15, 2016; and (c) Forms 14 through 9 of the fifth 14 are the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the instant dismissal under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and thus, the same shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article

2. Parts to be dried;

3. Determination on the claim for confirmation of worker status

A. Examining the legal principles as to the right to expectation of fixed-term workers and the legislative purport of Articles 5, 8(1), and 9(1) of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Fixed-term and Part-Time Workers, in addition to the legal principles as to the right to expect a fixed-term worker, the employer, in violation of this provision, refuses to convert into an employee with no fixed-term work period without reasonable grounds and notifies the termination of the employment contract, even if there is no fixed-term work period, the content of the employment contract, the motive and circumstance of the employment contract, the standard for conversion into an employee with no fixed-term work period, and other circumstances surrounding employment relations, such as the contents of the employment contract, the establishment of the procedure, the status thereof, and the contents of the work performed by the employee, etc.

Supreme Court on November 2016