The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of the claim.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant subcontracted D part of the remodeling project of a hotel (hereinafter “instant construction”) to D.

B. The Plaintiffs were employed by D from January 15, 2018 to April 25, 2018, and worked at the above construction site. The Plaintiffs were not paid KRW 2,400,000 as wages of March 2018, and KRW 2,800,000 as wages of April 2018, respectively, and KRW 5,20,000 as wages of April 2018.

C. On December 19, 2018, the Gwangju Regional Employment and Labor Agency issued to the Plaintiffs a written confirmation of overdue wages, etc. and business owners, stating that “D delayed payment of the total amount of wages of KRW 5,200,000,000 each, from March 2018 to April 2018, and a legitimate vertical constructor is the Defendant.”

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Where a construction business is conducted on two or more occasions in determining the cause of the claim and a subcontract under subparagraph 11 of Article 2 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry fails to pay wages to workers employed by a subcontractor who is not a constructor under subparagraph 7 of Article 2 of the same Act, the immediately preceding contractor shall be jointly and severally liable to pay wages to workers employed by the subcontractor;

(Article 44-2(1) of the Labor Standards Act. On the other hand, Article 2 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry provides that "construction works" means civil engineering works, building works, industrial equipment works, landscaping works, environmental installation works, and other works to install, maintain and repair facilities (including site preparation works for installing facilities) regardless of their titles, and installation and dismantling works, etc. of machinery and equipment and other structures. Thus, the instant construction works constitute construction works stipulated in the said Act.

In addition, the above fact that there is no evidence to regard D as a constructor as stipulated in the above law, the defendant is a direct contractor under the D's Labor Standards Act which employs the plaintiffs, and the defendant is 5,200 each of the wages paid to the plaintiffs.