1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s claim in this case is that the Defendant, upon receiving a contract from Jeollabuk-do to implement the “D Corporation” (hereinafter “instant construction”), employed the Plaintiff as an employee on August 5, 2014 and had the Plaintiff work as the head of the said construction site. The Plaintiff did not receive wages of KRW 150,000 from the Defendant during the period from September 27, 2014 to June 2015, as well as paid KRW 30,727,975 in total, including expenses for meals, on behalf of the Defendant during the period from August 27, 2014 to May 2015, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 45,727,975 (such as expenses for food, on behalf of the Defendant, on-site expenses, and on-site expenses, and damages for delay.

2. First of all, it is not sufficient to acknowledge that there was an employment contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the part of the Plaintiff’s claim for wage, on the sole basis of the Plaintiff’s written evidence Nos. 4, 17, 18, and 19 (including each number), and there is no other evidence to support this otherwise. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for wage in this part is without merit.

Next, the part of the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity is examined. 30,727,975 won paid by the Plaintiff in relation to the instant construction project is to be borne by the Defendant, and there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff paid it on behalf of the Defendant. Thus, this part of the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity also is without merit without examining further.

(In full view of each evidence presented, it may be deemed that a subcontract is concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant with respect to the instant construction project. However, even in such a case, the subcontractor cannot claim all kinds of payments directly paid by the subcontractor in connection with the instant construction project as they are, and only can claim the payment under the subcontract. (3) The Plaintiff’s claim for the conclusion is dismissed.