beta
Text
1.(a)
Defendant E shall pay Plaintiff A KRW 25,050,00, KRW 22,800,00 to Plaintiff B, KRW 22,240,00 to Plaintiff C, and KRW 22,240,00 to Plaintiff D.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant E
(a) A summary of the cause of the claim: as shown in the attached Form;
(b) Judgment by service: Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act;
2. Determination on the claim against Defendant FF Co., Ltd.
A. The facts of recognition 1) Defendant E (it is not registered for construction business under Article 2 subparagraph 7 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry) on February 27, 2018, after being awarded a contract from the owner of G building for the construction of complex facilities located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City.
(2) While Defendant E employed the Plaintiffs (Plaintiff A, C from March 8, 2018, Plaintiff B from March 9, 2018, Plaintiff D was employed from March 23, 2018), the construction was suspended on April 11, 2018 due to a dispute between Defendant Company and G building.
[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1, 2, and 3; the purport of the whole pleadings]
B. According to the facts of the above recognition, where Defendant E’s direct contractor is Defendant E and is a subcontractor under Articles 44-2(1) and 44-2 (Joint and Several Liability for Payment of Wages in Construction Business) of the Labor Standards Act (hereinafter “construction contract”) and a subcontractor who is not a construction business operator under subparagraph 7 of Article 2 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry fails to pay wages (limited to wages arising from the construction work in question) to workers he/she employs, the immediate upper contractor shall be jointly and severally liable for the payment of wages to workers employed by the subcontractor.
Defendant E is jointly and severally liable to pay unpaid wages.
(However, the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant company has a cause attributable to Article 44 of the Labor Standards Act). The scope of unpaid wages is examined.
The Plaintiffs provided direct labor until April 25, 2018, and thereafter unpaid wages.