1. The defendant's appeal against the plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party C is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. Presumed factual basis

A. The Plaintiff and the designated person engaged in construction machinery rental business under the trade name “E” in Chuncheon City D.

B. From July 7, 2015, the Plaintiff

8. By the end of 19.19. F (hereinafter “F”) performed construction work using construction equipment at the site of the construction (hereinafter “instant construction work”) over ten times, and the Defendant signed the “field confirmation” column in 10,000,000 won of the work day, on which the work fee is written at KRW 500,000 per day.

C. The selector from August 7, 2015

8. Until September, 19, the construction site of this case used 15 tons dump trucks to transport earth and sand over 11 times, and the Defendant written his signature in the column of “on-site manager (company agent)” column of 11 copies of the Construction Machinery Work Contract (Evidence No. 2-2 of the Evidence No. 2 of the Construction Machinery Work Contract, the work hours of which are eight hours a day.

【Unless there is a dispute over the ground for recognition, Gap evidence 1 and 2 [including the provisional number, the defendant denies the establishment of a construction machine work contract (Evidence 2-2 of the evidence A), but the authenticity of the document can also be proved by the comparison of the original document, and the comparison of the original document can be acknowledged as belonging to the free trial of the fact-finding court, barring any special circumstances, in a case where the writing of the document maker's writing and the document which is the object of proof is the same, the authenticity of the document can be recognized. In this case, the court may decide it by comparison with the original document without the need to determine the identity of the pen by means of appraisal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da38240, Dec. 12, 1997); the defendant's signature and the work log (Evidence 2-1 of the evidence A); the purport of the whole statement can be acknowledged as sufficient as the whole oral argument.

2. The existence of remuneration claims against the Plaintiff and the Defendant

A. The plaintiff 1 and the plaintiff.