1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff is a business entity whose main business is human resources supply, and the defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of construction business.

From September 28, 2016 to January 10, 2017, the Defendant was supplied with human resources by the Plaintiff while carrying out construction works for the neighborhood living facilities located in E and D (hereinafter “instant construction works”).

On September 28, 2016, F, the head of the 1st construction site and the representative of E, entered into a contract with G to build a new neighborhood living facility located in the H (hereinafter “instant second construction”) and was supplied with human resources by requesting the Plaintiff to supply the human resources to be invested in the said construction.

F delivered to the Plaintiff the name cards written in the Defendant’s complaint at the time of receiving human resources supply from the Plaintiff.

When supplying human resources at a construction site, the Plaintiff prepared the “work confirmation receipt” to refer to the future wage payment, and most of the “company name” column submitted by the Plaintiff includes the Defendant (B) and the “on-site work confirmation signature” column.

The second construction of this case, which was proceeding F, was interrupted on March 2017 due to the supply of funds, and G subsequently requested the Defendant to perform the remaining construction work upon receiving the construction site by requesting the Defendant to do the remaining construction work.

In total of the instant First and Second Works, personnel expenses of KRW 20,99,00 were incurred, and the Defendant paid KRW 14,839,000 to the Plaintiff from October 1, 2017 to June 13, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 3, 5, and 6, and the gist of the whole argument of the plaintiff's argument as to the purport of the whole argument, F was supplied with human resources from the plaintiff using the name of the defendant's field director, so even if some of the human resources supplied by the plaintiff were invested into the site of the second construction site of this case, the defendant.