1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in the business of supplying human resources for construction and civil engineering with the trade name of “I,” and the Defendant is a tree engaged in construction-related works.

B. F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) subcontracted to C the construction business with the name of “E” among the construction works that build two urban-type residential housing units on the ground of Scheon City D (hereinafter “instant construction work”).

C. On June 2015, C requested that the Defendant identify the construction workforce to be invested in the instant construction site.

The defendant delivered C's request for human resources supply to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff from June 16, 2015 to the same year.

8. Until 27.27, the Defendant supplied manpower at the construction site of this case and paid the wages to the manpower employed at the construction site of this case through the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant served as the head of a wooden team at the construction site of this case, and received wages from the plaintiff.

To have failed to pay wages, etc. during the instant construction, in the name of C, the Defendant, and H, the spouse of the Defendant and F, and F, in the name of H until August 10, 2015, F, the Defendant 5,000,000, and C, by August 14, 2015, respectively, paid KRW 5,00,000 to the Defendant until August 14, 2015, and F, respectively, written statements (Evidence 6) that demand the Defendant to pay the remaining wages by September 24, 2015.

E. On November 9, 2015, C drafted a payment note (Evidence A 1) to pay KRW 42,000,000, out of the unpaid wage to the Plaintiff by December 15, 2015.

F. Around June 2016, the Defendant submitted a complaint to the effect that C did not pay the Defendant the wage required for the instant construction to the Defendant, and affixed the complaint to the effect that C was accused of fraud. However, on October 7, 2016, the Defendant stated that C does not want to be punished for C in the course of a large examination with C.