Supreme Court dismissed appeal; contract for work deemed not employment due to lack of subordination.

The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal filed by a lecturer against a lower court's finding that his relationship with a language center was a contract for work rather than employment. The appellant argued that the work involved teaching children and that the employer exercised managerial control, yet the court found no subordination. The court ruled that the appellant had significant freedom regarding teaching schedules and program content, and his remuneration depended on course enrollment rather than time worked, establishing that the legal relationship lacked the essential elements of employment under the relevant code.