Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Plaintiff

G.

A. The Defendant Company is a company that has been subcontracted part of the construction work (hereinafter “instant construction”) by PO, which was subcontracted by L Co., Ltd., a contractor, with the construction work in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government M.

B. The Defendant Company subcontracted the instant construction to P to P to undertake the instant construction work.

C. The Plaintiff A, B, C, D, E, H, I, J and net F provided labor at the construction site for the same period as that set forth in the corresponding column of the attached Table, and was not paid the same wages as that set forth in the corresponding column of the same Table.

Q was convicted on January 22, 2019 of the facts charged in violation of the Labor Standards Act, as follows, as the actual operator of the Defendant Company, in Seoul Southern District Court 2017 High Court Decision 794.

1. Defendant (the same applies hereinafter) was not paid within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date for payment, despite the joint and several liability to pay KRW 37,85,000 for retired workers, including B, as indicated in the [Attachment Table] Nos. 1 to 10, 12, and 16 of the attached crime sight table (the same applies hereinafter to the judgment; hereinafter to the same applies) that P did not pay to P as a quasi-contractor, who is not a constructor under the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, to P, who is not a contractor under the construction industry.

2. Although the Defendant was jointly and severally liable to pay KRW 3,575,00 in March 2016 as wages of KRW 3,575,00 in March 2016 of R of retired workers and KRW 4,875,000 in April 2016, the Defendant did not pay the said amount within 14 days from the date of retirement without agreement on extension between the parties’ payment dates.

E. The net F shall be the first instance court of this case.