1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following judgments, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff entered into the instant employment contract with the Defendants operating F, and submitted additional evidence Nos. 11 and 12 at the trial. Accordingly, the examination of the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 11 was conducted on July 8, 2014 by the Commissioner of the Korea Employment and Labor Agency of the Jung-gu Regional Employment and Labor Agency, and even according to the statement, the Plaintiff filed a petition against Defendant B and E on October 31, 2013, but the Plaintiff’s representative denies the user-subsidiary relationship with the Plaintiff and the details of the delayed payment with the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff confirmed the above details of the delayed payment with the applicant. According to each of the evidence No. 12 and No. 29, the Plaintiff’s additional statement was found to be insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff entered into the employment contract of this case from the account in Defendant B’s name to the account in the Plaintiff’s name G account in the name of the Plaintiff on December 1, 201, and there was no further evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s deposit in each of this case.

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 6 through 8, 28, and 29, the Plaintiff filed a petition against Defendant B and B on February 9, 2015 with the same content as the Defendant’s petition on October 31, 2013, and the Central District Employment and Labor Agency rendered a criminal case as “E is deemed an employer under the Labor Standards Act that entered into a labor contract under the subordinate relationship with the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff submitted a written withdrawal of no penalty against E, the Plaintiff sent it to the Suwon District Public Prosecutor’s Office, and between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the relationship under which the Plaintiff used was dependent.