노무비 등
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The Plaintiff’s assertion on September 15, 2014, the Defendant contracted for the construction of the “D hotel” in Samcheon-si, Kimcheon-si (hereinafter “instant construction”) for the construction of the “D hotel” in Samcheon-si, Kim (hereinafter “instant construction, and the said construction site “instant construction site”).
The Plaintiff is a person engaged in human resources supply business with the trade name of “E”, and supplied human resources related to the structural construction at the construction site of this case.
However, the Plaintiff failed to receive labor cost of KRW 51,072,00,000 even after supplying the said human resources.
Therefore, as the Defendant directly entered into a labor supply contract with the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obligated to pay the labor cost under the contract to the Plaintiff (main assertion), and ② Even if the Defendant is not a contracting party, the Defendant, the owner of the construction site of this case, obtained unjust enrichment equivalent to the labor cost, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment.
(Preliminary Claim) 2. Determination
A. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff on the primary argument alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant entered into a labor supply contract with the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.
Rather, according to the purport of evidence evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 5 and the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking labor cost of KRW 51,072,00 and damages for delay thereof against the third class construction before the instant lawsuit, but lost the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have supplied human resources to the third class construction, and the possibility that the Plaintiff would have supplied human resources to H cannot be denied” and the judgment became final and conclusive (Seoul District Court Decision 2015Da3903, Oct. 14, 2015; Supreme Court Decision 2015Na16789, May 26, 2016; Supreme Court Decision 2016Da26990, Sept. 9, 2016). If the Defendant concluded a labor supply contract with the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff against the construction of the third class construction.