(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.22 2014나51014

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.22 2014나51014

노임

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion is the cause of the claim in this case. The plaintiff is a person who operates a job placement office with the trade name C, and the plaintiff entered into a labor arrangement contract with the plaintiff, at the request of D, to dispatch workers and pay wages to workers at the new construction site of Gyeonggi-gun E Multi-Family Housing (hereinafter "E site"), which is an agent of the defendant, and there was no right to enter into a labor arrangement contract on behalf of the defendant.

Even if the plaintiff believed that D is the defendant's on-site director and concluded a labor mediation contract for E site, the defendant is responsible for paying 6,205,000 won of wages of workers who occurred at E site in accordance with the legal principles of representation or expression agency.

2. Determination:

A. First of all, we examine whether D entered into an employment arrangement contract with the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant, and D had the name of the Defendant as the head of the site office of the Seoul Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F Urban Residential Housing Construction Corporation, which the Defendant contracted from April 2013. Upon D’s request, the Plaintiff dispatched workers from April 2, 2013 to June 2013. During the above construction, the fact that D was dispatched workers from May 2, 2013 to June 12, 2013 was not disputed between the parties, but there was no dispute between the parties, and that the Plaintiff did not have the authority to conclude an employment contract with the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff, on the basis of the entries in the evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 3-1 through 15.

B. After determining the assertion of liability for expressive representation, the Defendant is responsible for the expressive representation regarding the labor arrangement contract for the E site.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2015.10.21 2015나2692

-대전지방법원 2015.07.10 2015나968

-의정부지방법원 2018.12.14 2018나208513

-울산지방법원 2017.12.14 2017나21589

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.19 2015가단5108539