1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 5, 2013, the Defendant, who is operating a job placement office in the trade name of C, began to dispatch human resources to the Plaintiff at the Plaintiff’s request from November 5, 2013.

B. Around 2013 at the Plaintiff’s request, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming labor costs against the Plaintiff by asserting that it dispatched human resources to the scene of “D New Construction Construction Corporation prior to the withdrawal No. 1,” and “E Station Commercial Building.” On April 6, 2016, the said court rendered a decision to recommend performance (hereinafter “the instant decision”) to the effect that “the Plaintiff would pay to the Defendant KRW 5,940,000 and delay damages therefor,” and the instant decision became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff alleged that there was no labor cost to be paid to the defendant since he did not request the dispatch of human resources at each of the above construction sites as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the instant decision should not be allowed.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statement Nos. 1 through 4 of the judgment, the Defendant dispatched human resources to the Plaintiff from November 5, 2013 to January 16, 2014, and the Defendant did not receive labor costs exceeding KRW 5,940,000 from the Plaintiff until the instant decision was rendered on April 6, 2016, and there is no reflective proof otherwise.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Defendant the labor cost of KRW 5,940,000 as ordered in the instant decision and the delay damages therefor.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case, which is premised on the existence of an obligation under the decision of this case, is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.