A. C Co., Ltd. contracted and supplied electricity and facility construction for the factory buildings located in Ansan-si, Seoul-si, which was ordered by C Co., Ltd., and C Co., Ltd subcontracted this to the Defendant on June 2017.

B. The Plaintiff (designated parties, hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) and the remaining designated parties are workers employed by the contact and pipeline hole from July 2017 to September 2017 at the construction site.

2. - Not recognized as to the primary cause of action.

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, as the primary cause of claim, the Plaintiff and the rest of the designated parties (hereinafter “Plaintiffs, etc.”) concluded an employment contract directly with the Defendant and worked as an employee at the above site, and that they sought an objection since they did not receive wages for September 2017.

B. As to the fact that a direct employment contract was concluded between the plaintiff et al. and the defendant, each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 2-1 through 7 (the defendant's employment contract is marked as the employer, and the defendant's signature or seal is not signed or sealed) in compliance with this, is hard to believe in light of the facts acknowledged in the following 3. (the defendant entered into a subcontract with F, the plaintiff et al. entered into a contract with F, and the plaintiff et al. entered into the subcontract with F) and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, without any need to examine the remainder of the circumstances, the primary cause of the Plaintiff’s claim under the premise that a direct employment contract was concluded between the Plaintiff, etc. and the Defendant is without merit.

3. - Recognizing the conjunctive cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion - The Defendant asserted two grounds of claim selectively, and the Defendant was actually operating G.