1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

Claim:

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Defendant: (a) On July 2013, 2013, the construction of an officetel in Daegu-gu Ctel from the future soil-sponsing industry Co., Ltd.; (b) the interior, sprinking, and shooting (hereinafter “instant construction”) among the construction of an officetel in Daegu-gu Ctel (SPP Co., Ltd.)

(2) The Defendant was awarded a subcontract. 2) The Defendant had D use a daily tree hole to allow D to perform part of the instant construction work, and the Plaintiff, upon D’s introduction, worked as a wooden hole at the instant construction site from November 18, 2013 to December 10, 2013.

3) Under the supervision of E and F, the representative director of the Defendant, as the head of the Working Group, carried out the instant construction work together with those introduced by him, and the Defendant sent the Plaintiff et al. working log for the Plaintiff et al., the Defendant paid the pertinent wages to each of the instant public officials. D also received wages from the Defendant on the basis of KRW 170,000 per day, and paid the Defendant’s corporate card for the incidental expenses, such as meal expenses, etc. of the instant construction work. 4) The Plaintiff received from the Defendant on December 17, 2013 (i.e., 13 x 170,000 won per day x 170,000 won per day x 170,000 won per day x 30,000 won per day on December 1, 2013 x 300,000 won per day on December 31, 2013 (i.e., 00 won).

5. On August 7, 2015, the Defendant’s representative E was sentenced to a judgment imposing a fine of KRW 3,00,000 on the crime of not paying KRW 400,000 to the Plaintiff’s 12 public officials on the instant construction site as well as on the charge of not paying KRW 13,95,000 in total wages to the 12 public officials on the instant construction site.

E was sentenced to the judgment of the court below on November 17, 2015, on the grounds of the following: “The judgment of the court below is reversed and the fine of KRW 1,500,000 was imposed,” on the grounds of the circumstance that the appellate court of the court below (2015No2230) asserts only unreasonable sentencing while appealed from this judgment.”

The above judgment on November 25, 2015.