1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who is engaged in human resources supply and employment mediation business under the trade name of “C”, and the Defendant is a subcontracted construction company among the Damsung-gun D Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant construction”).

B. From January 2016, the Plaintiff supplied human resources to the instant construction site. From March 29, 2016 to January 1, 2017, the Plaintiff received total KRW 109,579,358 from the Defendant on eight occasions during the period from March 29, 2016 to January 1, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 6 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff supplied human resources to the instant construction site from January 1, 2016 to October 9, 2016 upon receiving a request from the Defendant for the supply of human resources for the instant construction site, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the service cost. However, the Plaintiff received service payment from the Defendant from January 1, 2016 to June 2016, and thus, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the service cost from January 1, 2016 to October 9, 2016. Therefore, the Defendant did not exclude KRW 48,539,000 from the total service cost deposited by the Defendant on January 1, 2017, after the Defendant applied for the payment order of KRW 48,539,00,000, which was deposited with the Defendant on January 1, 2017.2) The Defendant’s assertion that the instant construction work was subcontracted to E among the instant construction works.

The defendant paid the subcontract price to E by depositing it with the accounts as stated in the written claim submitted by E to the defendant.

The Defendant did not request the Plaintiff to supply human resources, and there is no fact that the Defendant concluded a human resources supply contract with the Plaintiff, and thus, the Defendant does not have the obligation to

B. We examine the following circumstances, i.e., the Plaintiff: (a) the entry of the evidence Nos. 1 to 6; and (b) the witness E’s testimony based on the overall purport of the pleadings.