1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the cause of the claim is an employee of the Do Young Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Do Young Construction”) with the main business of civil engineering and construction. At the time of the G Construction in 2012, the Do Young Construction paid KRW 19,000,000 to workers on behalf of the Do Young Construction in lieu of the Do Young Construction in lieu of the 2012 G Construction, the Plaintiff did not receive KRW 15,00,000 among them

Therefore, the Plaintiff is a creditor who holds a claim for indemnity arising from the subrogation of the Food Agency (hereinafter “instant claim”) against the Defendant in subrogation of the construction of the Do governor. Accordingly, the Plaintiff is seeking the performance of the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment against the Defendants of the Do governor Construction and the claim for damages arising from tort.

2. In a case where the right of a creditor to be preserved by subrogation is not acknowledged in a case of a creditor subrogation lawsuit, the creditor himself/herself becomes the plaintiff and has no standing to exercise the debtor's right to the third debtor, and such subrogation lawsuit is unlawful and dismissed.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da27188, Sept. 29, 2005). Therefore, we examine whether the Plaintiff’s right to preserve, i.e., the Plaintiff’s right to preserve construction, exists or not.

In full view of the overall purport of the statements and arguments by Gap evidence Nos. 1-5 through 7, the plaintiff paid KRW 3,900,000 with Samsung Card on March 4, 2013, and KRW 10,000 with the National Card on March 18, 2013, and KRW 5,100,000 with the Bar Card on March 18, 2013, but there is no evidence to prove that each of the above settlement amounts is due to the worker's consciousness on behalf of the plaintiff, while there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff can not exercise his right as a creditor, and thus, the lawsuit of this case is exercised by the plaintiff by subrogation against the defendants of Do Construction in order to preserve the claim of this case against Do Construction.