1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant implemented C Repair Work in Gyeongcheon-gun, Gyeongcheon-gun, and the Defendant’s site manager E requested the head of the Defendant’s site management office to supply the tree D who worked at the construction site of this case with the seal to put them into a food work site.

B. D requested the Plaintiff, who operates the Human Resources Development Corporation, to supply human resources, and the Plaintiff invested human resources at the construction site of this case from April 9, 2013 to June 22, 2013.

C. The Plaintiff’s service cost based on the Plaintiff’s request is KRW 8,750,00 for April 2013, KRW 23,780,00 for May 2013, KRW 8,820,00 for June 2013, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff only the service cost on April 2013.

(In fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 4, witness E, and the purport of the whole testimony and pleading)

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a service contract with the Defendant and supplied the seal to the Plaintiff at the instant construction site from April 9, 2013 to June 22, 2013, and the Defendant was obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 32,60,000 (= KRW 23,780,000) for the remaining portion of services on April 2013, as the Defendant paid only the service cost on April 2013.

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) did not enter into a service contract with the Plaintiff, and the Defendant subcontracted a food work work site D to a tree tree D at the instant construction site. Since D was supplied with a father and wife upon entering into a service contract with the Plaintiff, it cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s request. 2) The Plaintiff claims for the service cost by making an excessive statement on the number of copies and the amount of work work cost in the application form and the daily work cost statement with the Plaintiff. Thus, it cannot be acknowledged as it is, since it

3. Determination

A. As to the parties to the instant service contract, the following can be acknowledged in accordance with the results of the fact-finding on Gap evidence Nos. 8, Eul evidence Nos. 17 through 19, witness E, and D’s testimony, the case in the first instance court, the case in question, the Ecomcom, and the purport of the entire pleadings.