The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The purport and purport of the appeal

1. The purport of the claim;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant subcontracted C with part of the new construction of the E Partnership located in Heung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter “instant construction”).

B. From July 16, 2017 to August 2, 2018, the Plaintiff was employed by C from July 26, 2018 (excluding from July 26, 2018 to July 31, 2018) and worked at the said construction site. The Plaintiff was not paid KRW 1,805,000 for the amount of divided wages on July 2018, and KRW 380,00 for the amount of divided wages on August 2018.

(c)

On January 10, 2019, the office-based branch office of the Daejeon Regional Labor Office issued to the Plaintiff a business owner’s confirmation letter, such as delayed payment of wages, with the purport that “C the Plaintiff delayed payment of the total amount of wages of KRW 2,185,00 in July, 2018 and August, 2018, and that lawful affiliated constructors are the Defendant.”

[Grounds for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence No. 1 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a) Where a construction business has been executed two or more times a contract under subparagraph 11 of Article 2 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, and a contractor fails to pay wages to workers employed by a sewage supplier who is not a constructor under subparagraph 7 of Article 2 of the same Act, the immediately upper demand and supplier shall be jointly and severally with a sewage supplier to pay the wages to workers employed by a sewage supplier (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 construction works, building works, industry installation works, landscaping works, environmental installation works, and other works, regardless of their names, such as installation, maintenance, and repair of facilities (including site preparation works for installing facilities), machinery, equipment, and other structures (including site preparation works for installing facilities), so the construction works in this case constitute construction works provided for in the above Act.

(c)

In addition to the above facts that there is no evidence to view C as a constructor stipulated in the above law, the defendant shall be unpaid to the plaintiff as a direct contractor under the Labor Standards Act of C who employs the plaintiff.