beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s payment order for the wage case 2018 tea 288 dated March 23, 2018 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff is issued.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant filed an application for a payment order against the Plaintiff as the Seoul District Court Branch Branch Decision 2018 tea288 to seek wage payment against the Plaintiff.
In the foregoing case, the Defendant asserted to the effect that “the Plaintiff, from June 5, 2017 to June 25, 2017, performed the construction work of piling up stone of an erosion control dam at the Gangwon-gun C Day (hereinafter “instant construction work”) for 13 days from the Gangnam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gangwon-do, and that “the Defendant promised the Defendant to work at KRW 300,000,000 per day wage to pay for vehicle operation and expenses (including food expenses) and did not pay the said wage, etc.”
B. On March 23, 2018, the above court held that "the plaintiff paid KRW 4,940,000 to the defendant as well as damages for delay," and "the payment order of this case" as "the payment order of this case."
The instant payment order was served on the Plaintiff on March 28, 2018, and became final and conclusive on April 12, 2018. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The gist of the parties' assertion 1) When the plaintiff alleged that he/she participated in the construction of this case, the plaintiff was only three persons, including the plaintiff, non-party D, and E, and the defendant did not participate in the construction of this case, and there is no wage to be paid to the plaintiff to the defendant as well as since the contract with the defendant was not entered into with the defendant.
The Defendant provided cooperation in submitting civil petition documents to the Ministry of Labor in order for the Plaintiff to receive the Plaintiff’s wage from Nonparty F company (G company), but instead, the Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant in embezzlement.
B. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts can be acknowledged in the statements in Nos. 1, 6, and 8 of the facts of recognition.
1 Non-party H is located in Gangwon-gun C, which was ordered by F.