beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.01.15 2019나812

노무비

Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the total labor cost of KRW 8,300,000 and delay damages therefrom, since the Plaintiff, at the site of the new construction of the Da Hospital located in Seongbuk-gun, Sung-gun, Seongbuk-gun, the construction site manager, completed the construction work, and the Defendant, the owner of the construction, shall pay the labor cost to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion E is an employee of F Co., Ltd. (former trade name: G Co., Ltd.; hereinafter “F”) who entered into a contract for the said construction work on November 11, 2016, and the Defendant did not request the Plaintiff to work.

On May 15, 2018, the Defendant paid the construction price in full to F.

2. Determination

(a) In full view of the following facts, comprehensively taking account of the following facts, Gap 1, 3, 4 (including paper numbers), Eul 1 to 8 evidence, Eul 1 and Eul 1, and the witness E's statement and the purport of the entire pleadings of this Court:

1) The Defendant is the New Construction Corporation of the D Hospital (hereinafter “New Construction Corporation”).

2) On November 11, 2016, H performed the instant new construction project by entering into a contract for F and construction works (a construction cost of KRW 1,701,753,00,000, respectively) with F and the owner of the building.

3) On May 15, 2018, the Defendant issued a certificate of full payment of the construction price for the instant newly constructed construction from F, which was issued by F. 4) In executing the construction price for the instant newly constructed construction, the Defendant deposited the construction price into F, a contractor’s account in the name of the Defendant, with the payment of the construction price from the said F Account to each subcontractor and other traders (in the case of J, a former contractor, the construction price was executed in the same manner). In addition, the Defendant directly subcontracted the subcontractor.