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. From August 201 to March 2013, the Plaintiff invested human resources in the field of the C Corporation subcontracted by the Defendant from the Kudong Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant construction”) and performed the work of dismantling and arranging underground and ground floor molds, Dongburi, etc.

B. The Plaintiff, with the Defendant, prepared a subcontract form (No. 1,200 square meters x 63,767 square meters x 114,780,60 won (i.e., disposal expenses x 1,700 square meters x 100 square meters x 63,767 square meters) with respect to the dismantling of the above underground floor mold (i.e., 76, x 114,780,60 won (i.e., disposal expenses x 1,700 square meters x 100 square meters x 100 square meters x 63,767 square meters x 63,767) with respect to the dismantling of the above underground floor.

C. On November 13, 2013, the Plaintiff prepared a “written confirmation of wage settlement (Evidence No. 2)” indicating the total amount of wages of 470,770,000 won, 6,200,000 won, and the amount received from the Defendant as KRW 429,959,600, which was paid by the Defendant, by multiplying the number of human resources invested in the decommissioning and rearrangement work (dispact 1,497, 3,337) by the unit wage price (dispact 125,00 won, 85,000 won, 85,000 won) and affixed a seal thereon from the Defendant Company D.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1-1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff supplied human resources to the Plaintiff at the instant construction site between the Defendant and the Defendant, and the Defendant concluded a human resources supply agreement with the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff would pay the Plaintiff money calculated by multiplying the number of workers supplied at the instant construction site by the unit price (i.e., 125,000 won and 85,000 won for dismantling work).

However, during the construction process of this case, the defendant did not pay the wages of the father, and as a result, the plaintiff paid the wages instead of the plaintiff, and paid 6.2 million won to the father who suffered an accident at the construction site of this case under the name of hospital expenses and agreement.

Therefore, the defendant shall pay wages and agreed money that the plaintiff did not pay to the plaintiff on behalf of the defendant.