1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 56,719,00 and interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from May 5, 2017 to the date of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff recruited a letter with the trade name “B” and supplied a letter to a construction site.

B. The extreme East Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Mocheon Construction”) subcontracted the construction of reinforced concrete to the Defendant among the military installation works in Chuncheon City, which were contracted by the National Defense Infrastructure Foundation (hereinafter “Mocheon Construction”).

C. On April 15, 2016, the Defendant re-subcontracted D with the molding construction cost of KRW 530,000,000 during the said construction work, and the written contract provides that “each employee’s labor cost is paid in principle directly by the ordering person and the original beneficiary within the limit of the amount of the construction agreement, and all the obligation to pay the construction cost exceeding the amount of the construction agreement shall be paid to D.”

The labor cost of workers employed at the site in relation to the above mold construction was paid directly by the construction of extreme Dong without going through the defendant or D according to the contract until October 2016.

E. From November 1, 2016 to January 16, 2017, the Plaintiff supplied the seal to the pertinent mold construction site, and paid 56,719,000 won as wages to the parts of the Plaintiff.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6, 7, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Judgment on the parties’ assertion

A. In light of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant concluded a labor manpower supply contract with the Defendant and supplied the seal to the above site, and then paid KRW 56,719,00 on behalf of the Plaintiff, the Defendant should pay the wages in accordance with the above supply contract.

The defendant E, a person in charge of the construction site, supplied the seal as requested by the defendant E, and the on-site work also confirmed by E, and the plaintiff refused the defendant's demand to reduce wages, thereby denying the supply of human resources itself.

Preliminaryly, since the Plaintiff entered into a labor manpower supply contract with D and paid the wages of its father first, the wages of D employed by D, a subcontractor who is not a constructor, pursuant to Article 44-2 of the Labor Standards Act, are the subcontractor.