1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The quoted trial of the first instance court was examined closely by the parties’ allegations and the evidence presented at the first instance court and the first instance court, but it does not seem that there was any error in the fact-finding and judgment of the first instance court.

Therefore, the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the part of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as follows. Therefore, it is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant Co., Ltd.") in Section 2, No. 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance, which was written after the dismissal, shall be put into “the defendant”.

Each "Defendant Company" from 3 to 9 of the judgment of the first instance court shall be both "Defendant", and each "Defendant D" shall be both "Co-Defendant D of the first instance court".

On the third 15th 15th 15th 3th 201, Defendant B shall be put into “Plaintiff B”.

The four pages of the fourth decision of the first instance court shall be "the defendant" and the defendant shall be "the defendant".

Part 4 16 of the first instance court's decision shall be followed by "2. Plaintiffs' assertion and judgment thereon".

The 4th 17th 17th am the decision of the first instance court shall be applied to the plaintiff's "the plaintiff".

The following shall be added to the nine pages of the decision of the first instance:

【) The Defendant has reached the trial of the first and second contracts of this case, notwithstanding its title, can be deemed as a contract similar to “a transfer contract” between a kind of artist and his/her employees, the main purpose of which is to directly employ the Plaintiffs and dispatch them to Ethical works, and the Defendant asserts that the legal principles on a delegation contract cannot be applied as it constitutes a human resources dispatch business entity dispatching the pilots to overseas port works. However, it is insufficient to recognize that the first and second contracts of this case constitute a transfer contract, as alleged above, only with the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 21, 22, and 25 (including the serial number). Accordingly, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the above judgment constitutes a transfer contract, and contrary to the grounds to reverse the said judgment.