logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.07.19 2016나5762
임금
Text

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.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs provided each labor at the construction site of officetels in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant construction site”) and did not receive part of the wages.

The number of unpaid wages (units) 1 A from January 12, 2015 to May 2, 2015, 3,684,050 2 B B B B from January 12, 2015 to April 28, 2015 to April 28, 2015; 3 C C from March 9, 2015 to May 13, 207, 000 to April 9, 2015; 4,065,603 C; 4,07,000; 4 DD from March 9, 2015 to April 7, 201, 200; 5 E from March 6, 2015 to March 27, 2015 to 16, 16, 2016 to 3.6, 2015;

B. The period of service of the plaintiffs and the amount of wages not paid to them are as follows:

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, and 6 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. 1) The plaintiffs asserted that they were employed by the defendant who is an individual constructor, and provided labor. Since the defendant did not pay some wages to the plaintiffs, the defendant is the immediate contractor, Daesung C&C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "Masung C&C").

(2) The Defendant’s assertion did not employ the Plaintiffs, and the Defendant was also an employee employed as the working party in Daesung C&C.

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the Defendant’s employment of the Plaintiffs, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 7, and 8, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant is an employer who employed the Plaintiffs at the construction site of this case.

① On February 17, 2015, Daesung transferred wages to the Defendant’s account on January 2015, which was the first month that the Plaintiffs started to work at the construction site of this case, and thereafter, the Defendant distributed and paid them to the Plaintiffs.

arrow