2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. From March 200, C received from D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) with the trade name “A”, and employed approximately 40 and 50 workers at the secondary factory subcontractor, and provided contact. On November 7, 2005, C established Plaintiff A Co., Ltd. and performed an official contact with D and D in the said manner until June 30, 2012.

B. From around March 31, 201 to March 31, 2012, Plaintiff Non-computer Co., Ltd. employed approximately 40 workers and approximately 50 workers at the second factory subcontractor from D and Defendant, and employed them.

C. From around February 2008 to February 15, 2013, Plaintiff SP employed approximately 40 workers and 50 workers from D and Defendant’s subordinate offices in the first factory and employed them.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, entries in Gap evidence 27 to 30 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The Plaintiffs asserted that “D has agreed to pay four premiums to their employees against the Plaintiffs” between D and D regarding the instant lawsuit seeking payment, the Defendant, around November 201, entered into a settlement agreement with the Plaintiff Co., Ltd. on March 27, 2012, and the Plaintiff Co., Ltd. on June 29, 2012. According to each of the above settlement agreements, “After this settlement agreement, the Plaintiffs promised that the Defendant will not raise any civil, criminal, administrative, or objection against the Defendant regarding this case’s subcontract and this case’s settlement agreement, without claiming the Defendant to pay the additional amount of the construction cost for any reason in relation to this case’s subcontract and this case’s settlement agreement.” Thus, the Plaintiffs’ claim for this case’s lawsuit is practically concluded with the Defendant.