The Defendant entered into a contract with in-house subcontractors (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant’s partner companies”) for some of the duties in the manufacturing process, as a company engaged in manufacturing and selling various other fish and rubber products using 5,000 full-time workers at the Gwangju mine-gu W, the head office and Gwangju factory, Jeonnam G and the Gyeonggi-si.

The plaintiffs are those who are employed by the defendant's Gwangju factory or grain factory cooperation company on the date stated in the attached list of plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are those who provide labor in the manufacturing process by moving the relevant factory into another factory. While the inside cooperation company belonging to the defendant after its entry has changed, the new cooperation company actually succeeds to employment with the new cooperation company without suspending its work or changing the responsible process, and have been employed in the same list as the cooperation company listed in the same list at the time of the filing of the case.

The AI and AJ asserted that their work forms constitute dispatched work at the defendant's cromatic plant under the jurisdiction of AK (representative), which is a defendant's partner company, and filed a petition for correction of discrimination against the defendant, etc. with the Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission around August 2008.

On February 10, 2009, the Defendant received a corrective order from the Gwangju Regional Labor Office stating that “The business form of AI, etc. constitutes dispatched work, and directly employs them.” On June 17, 2010, the Defendant filed a lawsuit seeking revocation, such as direct employment order issued by the Gwangju District Court 2009Guhap1761, but was sentenced to the judgment against the Defendant on June 17, 2010. The Defendant appealed as the Gwangju High Court 2010Nu1346, but appealed as the Gwangju High Court 2010Nu1346, but was sentenced to the dismissal of the appeal on January 27, 201. The Defendant appealed as the Supreme Court 201Du6097, Jul. 2, 2011.