Seoul High Court 2009Nu28119 (2010.03)

Cho High Court Decision 2008west0756 (No. 18, 2008)

(1) Any disposition that is imposed on a business entity that provides construction subcontracting services is legitimate.

(main point of the original trial) The person who independently supplies services on the basis of the fact that he/she recruits and manages daily workers in connection with each project and settled wages, and received the settlement amount by his/her own passbook and paid it to other daily workers.

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the assertion on the grounds of appeal by the appellant falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition

Reference materials.

If the grounds of final appeal are not included in the grounds of final appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violations of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal does not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal, and refers to the system of dismissing final appeal by judgment without continuing to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal (see