1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are one-time workers who perform the work related to steel bars and molds at construction sites.O is an individual who runs a construction business, and Defendant P Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) is a corporation established for the purpose of reinforced concrete construction business.

B. R Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “R”) awarded a contract to S Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “S”) for the construction of the Busan Geum-gu Q apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment construction”) to S Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “S”), and S awarded a subcontract to S Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “T”) for the construction of reinforced concrete during the said construction (hereinafter “T”); and T was changed to U.S. on April 12, 2018.

C. On September 27, 2017, T has awarded a subcontract for the construction work of steel reinforced concrete parts among reinforced concrete parts (hereinafter “instant construction”) at the cost of KRW 615,600,000 for the construction work, and O employed the Plaintiffs and continued the said construction work.

S terminated the subcontract with T on December 21, 2017, and entered into a subcontract with the Defendant Company to enter into a contract with the effect that the instant apartment construction works are subcontracted with the cost of construction KRW 396,00,000 among the instant apartment construction works.

E. After entering into a subcontract between S and the Defendant Company, the O employed the Plaintiffs and carried out the instant construction work. The Plaintiffs were put into the instant construction site from December 2, 2017 to March 2018, and completed the work process related to steel bars and molds, but did not receive each wage as stated in the attached Table fromO.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiffs asserted that they were not paid wages from O even though they were engaged in the work related to the instant construction work as O's workers. The Labor Standards Act as O's direct contractor.