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 runs a business to manufacture and supply signboards, steel structures, etc. under the trade name of “B,” and the Defendant is a corporation with the purpose of advertising production and installation business, safety facility installation business, etc.

B. The Plaintiff manufactured and supplied various information signboards and construction companies, etc. (hereinafter “instant facilities”) at the site of manufacturing and installing new apartment complexes and safety facilities in buildings that the Defendant received contracts from construction companies, such as Samju and Kusan Marine Construction Co., Ltd., as follows:

On July 30, 2014, the date of the completion of the production and supply of the details of the site facilities, C Complex D's D's D'D' on July 30, 2014; on August 10, 2014, F's H apartment complex facilities on August 15, 2014, G apartment complex facilities on June 30, 2014, G apartment complex facilities on June 25, 2014, G apartment complex facilities on June 25, 2014; the fact that there is no partial dispute over the grounds for recognition on July 30, 2014; the fact that “A's evidence 1-2 and 3” was written and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff is a defendant's employee and completed a contract for the manufacture and supply of the facility of this case between K and K on behalf of the defendant. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the total amount of KRW 147,54,500 and delay damages.

B. The defendant's assertion K is an individual entrepreneur who is not the defendant's employee and has subcontracted the manufacture and supply of the facility of this case to the plaintiff again, and the defendant is not obligated to pay the plaintiff the cost of the manufacture and supply of the facility of this case.

3. Each statement of Gap evidence Nos. 1-1-8, Gap evidence Nos. 4, and Gap evidence Nos. 5-1 through 5, Gap evidence Nos. 6 and 7 is the fact that the plaintiff entered into a contract for the manufacture and supply of the facilities of this case with K representing the defendant as the employee of the defendant.