1. The Defendant paid KRW 7,350,00 to the Plaintiff KRW 5% per annum from May 21, 2015 to June 22, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 13, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a construction contract with the Defendant to receive a contract with part of B works contracted by the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (hereinafter “instant construction work”), contract unit price (16,000 won per square meter: 16,000 won per square meter: 2. 300,000 won per ton, and 3,000 won for steel processing and assembly, and 8,000 won for concrete building (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

B. Under the instant construction contract, the Plaintiff employed a person and worked for a father, and the Defendant, from April 20, 2013 to September 5, 2014, paid the Plaintiff totaling KRW 62,394,260 according to the volume of the Plaintiff’s work.

(The amount of labor cost for the employees invested by the plaintiff was paid by the defendant in a manner that the defendant directly pays the above amount. On September 5, 2014, the settlement amount was paid in KRW 7 million. [Grounds for recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, and Eul evidence 1 through 6 (including the serial number) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the labor cost of KRW 17,751,000, ② the unpaid temporary materials rent of KRW 7,350,00, ③ the total of KRW 32,101,00,000, and the delayed payment for the unpaid materials volume and KRW 7,000,000.

3. Determination

A. In addition to the instant construction work contracted by the Defendant, the Plaintiff asserted that labor cost claim for directly deducted construction works was 1,000, the Plaintiff, at the Defendant’s request, provided that other construction works, such as original franchise, seated, history park opening walls, etc., are directly operated by the Defendant, and worked in parallel with daily workers.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, including the Plaintiff, was engaged in construction work such as the original fluor by inserting C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, and M. Labor costs related to the above direct construction work are KRW 17,751,00 in total.

However, since labor costs related to the above direct operation are directly operated, the defendant is regardless of the plaintiff.