2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The owner C entered into a construction contract with the Defendant to contract the construction of the new building on the ground of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D with the Defendant.

B. On November 19, 2016, the Defendant entered into a construction contract with E Co., Ltd. (F Co., Ltd. on February 8, 2018; hereinafter “E”) with respect to which construction cost of temporary and reinforced concrete construction and reinforced concrete construction during the said construction are fixed as KRW 281,280,000 and subcontracted to E.

C. On December 2016, 2016, the Plaintiff re-subcontracted the wage for the instant reinforced concrete construction work (hereinafter “instant construction”) from H, introduced by the representative director G of E.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant’s introduction of G, the Defendant’s regular director, concluded the instant construction contract with H, and made the instant construction work, from December 11, 2016 to January 12, 2017, using four persons, such as steel-frames, concrete studs, and thermal studs, and four persons, respectively. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff labor cost of KRW 14,520,00 (i.e., KRW 140,00 per ordinary wage x 100 square meters x 140,000, a total of KRW 14,000, and KRW 520,00 of the non-public wage of KRW 520,00).

Even if the Defendant subcontracted the instant construction work to E without subcontracting the Plaintiff, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff labor cost pursuant to Article 44-2(1) of the Labor Standards Act.

3. Determination

A. The fact that there is no dispute over whether the Defendant entered into the instant construction contract with the Plaintiff, and according to the written evidence Nos. 3 and 5, the fact that the Plaintiff entered into the instant construction contract with the Plaintiff only or verbally with the introduction of G, and that H, on April 19, 2017, ordered G to prepare a payment certificate stating that “Defendant I would pay KRW 14,520,000 to the Plaintiff by May 10, 2017,” and issued the Plaintiff with the signature of H on the said payment certificate.

However, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 7, 10, and Eul Nos. 4, 8, 8.