【 Case 】 Zhang applied to a cleaning company and was arranged to work as a cleaner in a certain unit during the contract period, but a cleaning company did not pay social insurance premiums for him. Later, the Labor and Social Security Center of County A notified a cleaning company to make up for the unpaid social security fees and overdue payments of more than 10 cleaners, including Zhang, who had been suspended for a period of time. A cleaning company sent a message in its employee WeChat group stating that they can buy it themselves. So, Zhang held the "Notice on Overdue Payment of Employee Basic Pension Insurance (including Late Payment Penalty)" and paid the social security premiums. Afterwards, Zhang requested a cleaning company to return the social security premiums he had paid, but negotiations between the two parties were unsuccessful. Zhang and more than 10 other cleaners filed a lawsuit with the people's court. The court held that if the employer fails to pay social insurance for the employee and the employee requests the employer to return it after self payment, it belongs to the scope of cases that the people's court should accept according to law. The legal relationship of the labor dispatch contract between employers does not change the legal obligations of the employer. A cleaning company is a labor dispatch unit and should bear the social security fees for Zhang. It is judged that a cleaning company will refund Zhang's advanced social security fees and late fees, totaling more than 50000 yuan. According to relevant laws and regulations such as the Labor Law and Social Insurance Law, it is the legal obligation of employers to pay social insurance premiums in full and on time for workers. The court believes that the labor dispatch unit, as the employer of the worker, should pay the social insurance premiums to the social insurance agency in a timely manner in accordance with the law, regardless of whether the employer pays the social insurance premiums in full and on time according to the agreement. If the employer fails to pay social insurance for the employee during a certain period of time due to unclear labor dispatch agreements with the employer, the employer cannot use this as an excuse to transfer the risk to the employee. The trial judge stated that this case does not belong to a general social insurance dispute. Although Zhang filed a lawsuit on the basis of a labor dispute, the court, based on the identified legal relationship, tried it according to the unjust enrichment dispute and did not require Zhang to file a separate lawsuit, effectively reducing the burden of litigation on the parties. The court ruled in accordance with the law that a cleaning company should return the social security expenses advanced by Zhang, taking into account the principles of facts, law, and reason, and properly resolving the conflicts and disputes. (New News Agency)