logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.01.30 2019나4165
근로비
Text

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

2...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is a person engaged in the business of fee placement, human resources management and services, and the defendant is a person engaged in the business of manufacturing communications equipment and parts.

B. In around 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a contract on the dispatch of workers with the content that the Plaintiff would be paid 20% of the total monthly wages of the workers dispatched to the Defendant’s workplace, and then dispatch the workers to the Defendant.

C. Around July 2016, the Defendant contracted part of the production process of parts to Nonparty C (hereinafter “C”) for reasons such as poor sales, etc., and the Plaintiff, at the Defendant’s request, dispatched workers to C’s workplace to work.

C was closed around September 2016 due to business depression, etc., and the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to pay KRW 20,789,414 for the dispatch of workers dispatched to the said C workplace, but failed to receive it from the Defendant.

Accordingly, from November 2017, the Plaintiff did not dispatch workers at the Defendant’s workplace.

E. On March 1, 2018, the Plaintiff concluded a contract for the dispatch of workers (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant. In relation to C’s dispatch cost of KRW 20,789,414, the Plaintiff agreed that “in relation to C’s dispatch cost of KRW 20,789,414” under Article 13(3) of the instant contract, 5% of the C’s total sales amount of KRW 20,789,414 should be additionally claimed and repaid.”

F. The Plaintiff is a person who received 614,373 won, which is part of C’s dispatch cost of 20,789,414 won.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5, 7, and 17 to 19, the purport of the pleading before oral argument

2. The assertion and judgment

A. At the time of July 2016, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion demands that D, an employee of the Plaintiff, dispatch workers to the Plaintiff’s workplace, and accordingly, dispatch workers to the Plaintiff.

arrow