logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원김천지원 2014.10.01 2014가단7083
인건비
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who supplies human resources with the trade name “B”.

B. On August 28, 2013, the Defendant awarded a contract for the C Extension work from the wedding natural fireworks Village, and subcontracted the 142,560,000 reinforced concrete construction work among which around August 28, 2013, to the Gyeong Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Large Construction”).

C. The Plaintiff supplied human resources from August 2013 to October 2013 at the C extended construction site (hereinafter “instant construction site”).

The Defendant paid 1,456,500 won to the Plaintiff on August 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff supplied human resources from September 2013 to October 2013 at the instant construction site, and the Defendant agreed to pay the labor cost directly. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff labor cost of KRW 26,724,50 and delay damages therefrom from September 2013 to October 2013.

3. Prior to the determination, the following circumstances acknowledged by the respective entries in the evidence Nos. 3 and 4 as well as the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the Plaintiff appears to have claimed for the payment of labor cost of KRW 26,724,500 from September 2013 to October 2013 before the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit, the Defendant appears to have paid labor cost of KRW 26,724,50 directly to the Plaintiff upon the request of large-scale construction; the subcontract between the Defendant and large-scale construction appears to include labor cost; and the Defendant paid KRW 60,000 out of the subcontract price to large-scale construction on October 15, 2013, the Plaintiff appears to have received a request for large-scale construction, and there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant directly paid labor cost to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, it is true.

arrow