The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

1. The reasoning of the court of the first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows, and thus, the reasoning of the first instance judgment is identical to that of the court of the first instance, except for the following cases. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article

(1) The judgment of the court of first instance, which rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion, is justifiable even if the Plaintiff filed an appeal and the evidence submitted by this court were examined in the first instance court, and all of the evidence presented by the first instance court and this court are examined). The court of first instance, which rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion, is “The fact-finding and the judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable.” In the previous judgment, the Intervenor merely determined that the Intervenor is an employer under the Labor Standards Act (No. 21 No. 21, No. 16, No. 17) of the Plaintiff, on the ground that “The Intervenor entrusted management to G while he entrusted to the specialized service company, it seems that the field of security service is actually being operated in the form of self-management” (No. 21).

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.