The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Since the Defendant agreed to pay E and monthly salary as 1.2 million won, the Defendant did not have the obligation to pay an additional amount below the minimum wage to the Defendant. Since E has worked from January 27, 2012 to January 24, 2013 and has less than one year, the Defendant has no obligation to pay retirement allowances to E.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Judgment

An employer liable to pay wages above the minimum wage shall, in a conclusion of a labor contract, determine the basic wages of the worker and pay the aggregate of the allowances by adding them based thereon. However, if an employer concludes a wage payment contract based on the so-called comprehensive wage system with the content that the aggregate of the allowances shall be determined as a monthly wage or daily wage, or that the amount of the specified amount shall be paid as an allowance, without calculating the basic wages in advance, in light of the convenience of the calculation of the work hours and the nature of the work and the nature of the work, etc., if it is deemed that there is no disadvantage to the worker and justifiable in light

(2) The Defendant and E pay monthly pay, including the allowance, inasmuch as the Defendant and E do not obtain the approval of the Minister of Employment and Labor as to the exclusion of the minimum wage under the Minimum Wage Act, even if the comprehensive wage contract is valid, since the provision on the minimum wage under the Minimum Wage Act is applied to the employee, the employer is obliged to pay wages above the minimum wage (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do4737, Oct. 11, 2007).