beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The judgment of the court of first instance.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant employed the Plaintiff while jointly operating (Dong) B and the construction company, set the Plaintiff’s wage, and ordered and managed the Plaintiff at the construction site, and thus, the Defendant is jointly and severally obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid wage of KRW 6,800,000 to the Plaintiff.
B. It is not sufficient to recognize that the entries of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 14 (including branch numbers) are not sufficient to recognize that the defendant and Eul jointly operated a construction enterprise (Dong business) and were in a position to use the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
Rather, the following circumstances, namely, the Defendant and B made separate business registrations, based on the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 13, Eul evidence Nos. 13 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and the investigation agency asked the Defendant to leave and manage the construction site because they did not have management of all construction sites by themselves because they had received several construction sites at the same time. All construction sites have received orders, and they do not run the same business with the Defendant, and they agreed to pay a little amount of money to the Defendant in return for the settlement of wages after the payment of the wages per day, and they managed the construction site as the head of the site.” [B] written a written confirmation to the effect that "B and the Defendant carried out the construction site" (Evidence No. 2) and written a statement to the effect that "B and the Defendant carried out the construction site at the time of the Busan Regional Employment and Labor Administration in the Busan Regional Employment and Labor Agency in accordance with the testimony No. 1 and No. 3 of the Busan District Prosecutors' Office in accordance with the above testimony No. 1 and No. 4 (No. 63).