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. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the judgment of the first instance as follows, and thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In addition, the Plaintiff asserts that, in the trial of the competent court, the Foreign Manpower Policy Committee’s decision (the Minister of Employment and Labor No. 2015-390, Dec. 23, 2015) was unconstitutional by infringing on the freedom of occupation and violating the principle of equality, and that, even if not, the provisions of this case’s ground provision cannot be applied to the Plaintiff that is not the original contractor, there is no ground for disposition. However, the Supreme Court Decision (Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2016Guhap80687, Mar. 15, 2018) finalized on March 15, 2018 (Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2017Nu72982, Nov. 23, 2015) (the Seoul High Court Decision 2017Nu72982, Nov. 23, 2015) was unconstitutional, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the above ground for disposition can not be accepted.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.

The judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.