1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation engaged in the job placement business, etc., and operates a branch office, other than the head office, such as tamping point, virtue, and gender south point.

B. The Defendant, around October 2017, notified the Plaintiff of the additional premium for the settlement of employment insurance and industrial accident compensation insurance (hereinafter “industrial accident insurance”) on the difference in the total remuneration in the year 2016 for the daily employed workers introduced by the Plaintiff to the construction company in 2016, as follows: 36,188,950,637,310 64,826,260 260 7,512,740,740,66,430,430 7,789,170 9,027,7107,7107,983,460,460,011,170,2395,250,2398,9740,686,686,686,67,5686,67,960 7,605,686,67,696,75,70

C. On March 16, 2018, the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 151,954,060 for insurance premiums and arrears imposed as above.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff is an employment broker, and the daily employed worker introduced by the plaintiff to the construction company is not a worker belonging to the plaintiff, but only a fee is collected by the plaintiff after introducing the worker to the construction company.

Therefore, the above worker's employment and industrial accident insurance premiums should be reported and paid by the construction company.

Nevertheless, the defendant regarded the plaintiff as engaging in human resources supply business and made an imposition of employment and industrial accident insurance premium (hereinafter referred to as "disposition in this case") against the plaintiff. The disposition in this case is a disposition against the plaintiff who does not have the obligation to pay insurance premium, and its defect is so serious and invalid.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the total of 151,954,060 won and delay damages for the premium and arrears paid by the plaintiff as the return of unjust enrichment.

B. Determination is based on the following factors: (a) description of No. 2; (b) description No. 2; (c) description of North Busan District Tax Office; (d) head of Sungnam District Tax Office; (e) Busan District Tax Office; and (e) head