(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.05 2014고정1316

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.05 2014고정1316

근로기준법위반

Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, as a representative of F (Revised Trade Name: G) on the first floor of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, employs six full-time workers and operates a dan business.

The Defendant worked from September 9, 2013 to September 25, 2013, and retired from H’s retirement, within 14 days from the date of each retirement, without any agreement on extension of the due date between the said parties to the payment period.

2. Determination

A. The key issue of the instant case is that H and I performed work at a certain period of time in connection with the interior works of the said workplace (hereinafter “instant construction works”). There is no dispute as to the fact that H and I performed work at a certain time.

The Defendant entered into a contract with J, etc. concerning the interior of a workplace as stated in the facts charged, and H and I are subject to the management and supervision by J. Accordingly, the Defendant denied the instant facts charged to the effect that he does not bear a duty to pay wages in the position of employer.

Ultimately, the issue of this case is whether or not the defendant is the employer's status with H and I, that is, whether or not the defendant's explicit implied labor contract relationship is recognized between the above parties.

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court as to whether the Defendant is the employer’s status, it is difficult to readily conclude that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is the employer’s status with H and I, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

1. On July 4, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract on the design, drawing preparation, construction supervision, marketing, reproduction, Astrupt operation, rental, etc. of the D, J, L and F as stated in the facts charged.

The above contract is divided into “project A” and “project B,” and J and L.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2013.12.30 2013고정607

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2018.07.19 2017고정1261

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2020.04.21 2019고정458

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.09.13 2017고단912

-서울북부지방법원 2015.03.25 2015고단467