beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim against the primary defendant is dismissed.
2. Preliminary Defendant amounting to KRW 76,065,00 and KRW 76,00.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The primary Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) was awarded a contract with D agency for a new construction work at the head office, Dongnam District Headquarters, Dong-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant construction work”).
As of May 9, 2016, Defendant B drafted a standard subcontract agreement on construction works between Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) to subcontract the construction of reinforced concrete to KRW 1,581,795,600 during the construction period from May 9, 2016 to July 31, 2016.
B. The Plaintiff, who is engaged in human resources placement and supply business in the name of “G” in Busan Seo-gu, and supplied human resources to the instant construction site from September 2015.
C. Upon completion of work, the Plaintiff operated a human resources company by paying the daily wage on the same day from the company supplied with human resources as the Plaintiff’s funds for the next month. Until now, the Plaintiff did not receive the total of KRW 48,075,000 as wages on October 1, 2016 and KRW 76,065,000 as wages on November 201, 2016, which were supplied to the instant construction site.
[Ground of recognition] Each entry of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1, 1, 2, and 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Each argument of the parties
A. On September 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff supplied human resources to the instant construction site at the request of H who worked as the head of the Defendant B’s site at the instant construction site.
While the Plaintiff supplied human resources at the construction site of this case, Defendant B subcontracted the remainder of the non-construction work of this case to Defendant C.
Although the Plaintiff supplied human resources at the construction site of this case, the Plaintiff did not receive total of KRW 76,065,000 for October and November, 2016.
The Plaintiff did not know the internal relationship between the Defendants in the current situation where the Defendants transferred their responsibilities to each other. Therefore, the Defendant B was the primary one.