1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in the labor service business, and the Defendant Company is a company established for the purpose of civil engineering, construction, etc.

B. On June 10, 2016, the Defendant Company contracted with C to provide the Defendant Company with all human resources necessary for reinforced concrete framed construction among the said construction works (a wood hole, steel-frame, steel-frame, non-construction, and concrete).

C. After that, from July 14, 2016 to August 13, 2016, the Plaintiff provided human resources, such as tree trees and steel bars at the same construction site.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, and Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff provided human resources to the Defendant Company through the introduction of C, and the Defendant Company is obligated to pay the remaining wage of KRW 17,211,00 to the Plaintiff. Even if the Defendant Company subcontracted part of the above construction work from the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company, who subcontracted part of the construction work, to C, a non-registered constructor, is jointly and severally liable to pay the remaining wage to C and the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 44-2 of the Labor Standards Act (Joint and Several Liability

B. 1) First, as to whether the Defendant Company is a contracting party to whom it was directly provided with human resources from the Plaintiff and is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the above remaining wage, the statement of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 alone is difficult to view that the Plaintiff constitutes the Plaintiff’s employer, or that the Plaintiff directly concluded the above human resources provision contract with the Defendant Company that is not C, and there is no other evidence to support this, and therefore, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit without examining the remainder. 2) Next, as to whether the Defendant Company is jointly and severally liable to pay the remaining wage to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 44-2 of the Labor Standards Act.