logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.11.29 2017나2483
임금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant Company is a company established for the manufacturing of steel structure, construction, etc., and around 2015, it was awarded a contract from Nonparty ELM General Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ELM General Construction”) for the “Iron Construction” (hereinafter “instant construction”).

B. From July 14, 2015 to August 19, 2015, the Plaintiff provided labor at the instant construction site. From July 14, 2015 to August 19, 2015, the Plaintiff was not paid KRW 2340,000 wages for July 2015 and KRW 1.260,000 wages for August 2015.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, Eul Nos. 1, 9, and 1 and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant Company and provided work at the instant construction site under the direction and supervision of Nonparty C, who received business instructions from the Defendant Company. As such, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid wages of KRW 3.6 million (= KRW 1.2.6 million on July 2015).

B) Even if the Plaintiff’s employer is deemed C, the instant construction work was contracted on two or more occasions under the Framework Act on the Construction Industry. Since C, a subcontractor, is not a constructor registered under the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, and the Plaintiff, a contractor, was not paid wages arising from the instant construction work, the Defendant Company, as a contractor, is jointly and severally liable with C to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid wages of KRW 3.6 million and its delay damages. (2) The Defendant Company, as a contractor, has the duty to pay the Plaintiff the said unpaid wages of KRW 3.6 million and its delay damages. (3) The Defendant Company, as the Plaintiff was employed by C, subcontracted the steel frame installation work among the instant construction work to Nonparty E, who is engaged in the construction business under the trade name of “D” (hereinafter “D”), but D re-subcontracts the said steel frame installation work to C, and thus, D’s title

arrow