logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.12.16 2016가단107537
임금
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 4,510,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the amount from September 1, 2015 to February 18, 2016.

Reasons

1. The assertion;

A. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter only referred to as the Plaintiff) was engaged in the non-intermediate construction and human resources supply business. From March 2014 to March 2015, the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) contracted and performed the non-intermediate installation work at the construction site.

However, around March 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a system club labor contract with the Defendant and the Defendant on the construction site B located in Daegu Suwon-gu (hereinafter “instant labor contract or the instant labor contract”) and entered into labor work. Since the Defendant did not pay KRW 4,100,000 out of total labor cost, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 4,100,000 and value-added tax thereon.

B. The Defendant filed a counterclaim: (1) The Plaintiff was engaged in a non-commercial work that the Plaintiff, while conducting the labor work in accordance with the instant labor contract, set up a safety light connected to the same base (hereinafter referred to as the “instant additional work”) which was simply simply seen as the materials from the beginning of the work due to the safety relationship of the beams and mold workers at the time of the work.

② However, the instant Additional Corporation is required to make the safety launch plate of the upper part of the mold work workers, which is linked to beams and Dongba, and only the materials equivalent to 37.6% of the materials required for winter operations under the general foundation. Therefore, the transfer of labor input in proportion thereto is reduced.

③ Therefore, even though the labor cost for such additional construction is claimed by applying the slot unit price, the Plaintiff claimed an unfair labor cost by applying the same lower unit price than the slot unit price.

④ Ultimately, the Plaintiff applied the unit price of 94,036,50 won to the instant additional construction works, and applied the unit price of 122,709,840 won by applying the unit price of slve to the instant additional construction works.

arrow