The plaintiff's claim that the court changed in exchange for the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

The total cost of the lawsuit shall be.

Facts of recognition

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: (a) the third-party 5 of the judgment of the first instance is dismissed as “participation, etc. of Defendant C Co., Ltd.”; and (b) the fourth-party 7 through fourth-party 2, except for deletion of the fourth-party 4 from the same side of the judgment of the first instance to the last-party 4 from the same side; and (c) thus, it is identical to the ground for the second-party 7 to the fourth-party 2 from the first instance judgment. Accordingly,

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff provided labor as a labor team leader by recruiting the number of trees, steel bars, and studs of the instant construction work to Defendant B, who re-demanded the instant construction work from Plaintiff G and Defendant Company, and the Plaintiff provided labor as the labor team leader. The Plaintiff agreed to pay directly labor costs to the Plaintiff, thereby receiving such payment from the Plaintiff.

In addition, the Plaintiff did not re-demand the instant construction from Defendant B.

From July 2016 to May 2017, the Plaintiff’s labor cost for the instant construction work is KRW 631,687,500. Of the 548,645,120 won received from Defendants and Co., Ltd., the Defendants and Co., Ltd., the amount of KRW 2,00,000 on August 2, 2016, and KRW 2,300,000 paid from Co., Ltd. was material cost, and the amount of KRW 2,30,000 paid from Co., Ltd. was not related to each labor cost. Thus, the Plaintiff’s labor cost is excluded from the amount of KRW 544,125,120.

In addition, at the request of Defendant B, the Plaintiff provided labor to additional construction, such as underground parking lots, and its labor cost is KRW 10,960,000.

On the other hand, since the defendant company allowed the use of name to the defendant B, it is also liable to name the name holder in accordance with Article 24 of the Commercial Act.

Therefore, Defendant B was provided with labor from the Plaintiff, and the Defendant Company agreed to directly pay or lent its name, and jointly received the payment from the Plaintiff at KRW 631,687,50,00, which is the sum of the unjust enrichment of KRW 10,960,00, equivalent to the labor cost related to the additional construction work, and KRW 642,647,50, which is the sum of KRW 647,50.