1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is that the court added "the testimony of the witness G of the court of first instance" after the "written evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1 through 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance" for the reasons of the judgment of the court of first instance, and that it is the same as the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the correction as stated in Paragraph 2 of the following, since it is the same as the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Part in which the depth of a trial is advanced;

A. Of the first instance court’s first instance judgment Nos. 9 and 12, “the Plaintiff, as the field director, has performed his duties in the way of paying wages at the time of entering the documents related to the payment of wages in the form of payment of wages, and had no knowledge of the issue of the settlement of wages E at the time of the instant accident.”

- - Next, “The plaintiff, a field manager, has carried out work in the way of paying wages to the plaintiff as they are, and the defendant ordered G, an on-site employee, to prepare approval documents in accordance with the wage request submitted by him/her, and he/she compared the wage request submitted by him/her and the amount of work performed by him/her, and the defendant did not report it to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff was not aware of the fact that he/she applied for wages. The purport of the written answer (Evidence A No. 1) of May 11, 2016 prepared by E was that the defendant would pay wages to E by December 2013, and the defendant, who delayed this, had the defendant claimed wages from the defendant.”

B. Of the fourth and sixteenth sentence of the first instance court, “it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff could have predicted or predicted the occurrence of a fire-fighting accident, such as the instant accident, from the standpoint of the Plaintiff, within the said office” as follows.

-The following - The plaintiff shall be E only with the descriptions of the evidence of sub-paragraph 1 to 6.