1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 7:

The defendant was entrusted by the Korea Electric Power Corporation for the purpose of checking and checking electrical instruments, etc. on behalf of collection agency, measuring instruments, etc., and was entrusted by the Korea Electric Power Corporation.

The Plaintiffs entered into an entrustment contract (hereinafter “instant entrustment contract”) with the Defendant on the date of commencement of each service indicated in the “retirement Allowance for each Plaintiff” in the attached Form, and was commissioned as an outsourced employee, and was dismissed on the date of the end of each service.

B. The Plaintiffs were employed respectively as a commissioned person who conducts inspection (hereinafter “inspection personnel”) or a commissioned person who conducts service (hereinafter “service personnel”) during each of the above service period.

2. The parties' assertion that the plaintiffs were employed by the defendant in the form of the entrustment contract, but in fact, the defendant set the plaintiffs' duty and place of work, and had the plaintiffs take charge of the same duties under the defendant's direction and supervision while working in the office such as regular employees. In addition, in order to perform the same education as regular employees, the plaintiffs were required to attend the office, and they were bound to a certain degree of time to commute to and from work, and they were bound to a certain extent, and they continued to work until July 31, 2009, when the entrustment contract with the defendant is terminated. Thus, the plaintiffs constitute a worker under the Labor Standards Act who provided labor to the defendant in a subordinate relationship with the defendant, and the defendant is obligated to pay the amount stated in the claim as retirement allowance to the plaintiffs.

On the other hand, the defendant is only an individual entrepreneur who entered into an entrustment contract with the defendant and provided labor to the defendant in the subordinate relationship with the defendant.