1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a subcontractor who was awarded a subcontract for in-house electrical construction from D, a contractor for in-house electrical construction works for in-house Cown-gu, Gyeyang-gu.

B. The Plaintiff provided labor from December 19, 2017 to February 14, 2018 at the construction site, but did not receive a total of KRW 3,060,000 for the provision of labor.

C. Meanwhile, D transferred the construction cost to the Defendant corporate account five times, and transferred it to E personal account four times.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff entered into an employment contract with the Defendant and provided labor, and the Defendant is liable to pay the unpaid wages.

Even if the defendant awarded a subcontract to E, the defendant lent the name to E, and the defendant employed the plaintiff in the name of the defendant, so the defendant is liable for the nominal lender under Article 24 of the Commercial Act.

B. The gist of the defendant's argument was that the defendant awarded a subcontract for electrical construction to E, and that E employs the plaintiff, there is no labor contract between the defendant and the plaintiff.

Plaintiff

The defendant is not liable for the nominal name holder under Article 24 of the Commercial Act because he/she was aware of such circumstances.

3. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by each evidence mentioned earlier as to the Defendant’s obligation to pay wages, the Defendant at least bears the obligation to pay the unpaid wages to the Plaintiff as the nominal lender pursuant to Article 24 of the Commercial Act.

(1) The written confirmation of the overdue wage, etc. and the business owner on June 20, 2018, which was prepared as a result of the investigation conducted by the head of the Goyang-si District Labor Office, stated that “the defendant (actual representative: E) delayed payment of wages to the plaintiff.”

(2) Article 14 (1) of the Electrical Construction Business Act prohibits a subcontract for electrical works in principle.