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 first instance court.
Reasons
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is that each “2014” of the acts No. 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance is “2013,” and it is the same as the written judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the judgment as stated in the following 2.3. As such, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that, on July 4, 2013, the payment confirmation (Evidence A 2) stating the content of the instant agreement was made between the Defendant and the Defendant on the job without the Plaintiff after the Defendant agreed to pay wages, etc. to the Plaintiff, and the part on the condition that the payment confirmation is subject to the receipt of a written statement of direct payment, etc. among the payment confirmation cannot affect the Plaintiff, and that the Defendant should pay wages, etc. to the Plaintiff regardless of whether it received the written statement of direct payment, etc.
In light of all the circumstances, including the developments leading up to the conclusion of the instant agreement, the contents of the agreement, and the fact that the Plaintiff actually submitted a written confirmation (Evidence No. 2) with respect to the wage for six months to the Defendant, the entire agreement of this case may be null and void in accordance with the legal principles on partial invalidation, since a series of acts resulting in the instant agreement by preparing a written confirmation of payment specifying the detailed contents, such as the agreement to pay wages, etc. to the Plaintiff by a third party, and the agreement to pay wages, etc. between the Defendant and the Defendant on the receipt of direct and unpaid consent, etc., is an indivisible legal act constituting an economic and factual whole form, and the Defendant did not have the Plaintiff at the time of the instant agreement.