beta
Text
1. In accordance with the expansion of the purport of the claim in the trial, the judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. A. On September 201, 2011, the Save Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Save Industry”) contracted for reinforced concrete construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) from the Hadd Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Maddd Construction”). Since there was a problem in entering into a contract due to taxes in arrears, etc., the Defendant contracted for the instant construction from the Had Construction and entered into a subcontract in the form of sub-contractor and re-subcontracted the instant construction in the form of large-scale industry. In fact, the Mad Construction would actually undertake the instant construction.
B. From September 201, the Plaintiff (Appointeds) and the designated parties (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs, etc.”) were employed as a daily worker in the instant construction industry, and provided labor by molding the instant construction work site.
C. Around December 201, 201, the instant construction project was closed at the site of the instant construction project, and thereafter I and J supervised the instant construction site as the head of the site.
Plaintiff
From September 201 to May 17, 2012, the employer provided labor at the instant construction site from September 201 to May 17, 2012. The wages from September 201 to December 2011 were paid from the macro industry, and the wages from January 201 to April 2012 were paid directly by the Defendant, preparing a statement of direct payment and a certificate of loan to the Trad Construction, and the Defendant was paid directly from the Had Construction. The wages for labor from May 1, 2012 to May 17, 2012 were not paid, and the unpaid amount of wages are as stated in the attached Table.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's Evidence Nos. 4, 6, 7, 9, 11 through 26 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. As the Plaintiff et al. asserted by the parties were employed by the Defendant from January 2012 to work at the construction site of this case, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff et al. unpaid wages and damages for delay.