A. On April 2012, the Plaintiff is an employee of C (individual) who is a part manufacturer of automobile operated by the Defendant.

B. On February 21, 2013, the occurrence of an accident and the Plaintiff suffered an accident where the left hand is divided into the press presses (hereinafter “instant accident”) while working in the press presses without a license around 11:50.

The Plaintiff sustained injury from cutting the left hand hand 2, 3, 4, 5 water by the instant accident.

[Reasons for Recognition] The absence of a dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 through 14 (including each number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the commission of appraisal to the president of the Daegu Casl University Hospital at this Court, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. As the Plaintiff’s employer, the Defendant should have sufficiently explained the Plaintiff’s work process and thoroughly provided safety education to ensure that part of the body does not enter the press.

In addition, the defendant must use the hand inevitably by the plaintiff.

Even if there was a mechanical measure to prevent danger (e.g., installation, maintenance, and repair of physical center, etc.) and supervision during work to prevent accidents in advance.

The defendant did not perform these obligations properly and had the plaintiff operate presses without sufficient safety education or mechanical measures, monitoring and supervision, and without proper placement of personnel.

In particular, since the plaintiff was a foreigner of Uzbekistan nationality who was not proficient at the end of Korea, the defendant had been given an explanation of the presses operation process and safety education so that the plaintiff could have been sufficiently identified.

Ultimately, the instant accident occurred due to the Defendant’s violation of the duty of care for safety.

The defendant is an accident entirely caused by the plaintiff's negligence since the accident of this case occurred between the plaintiff and the knife by disregarding safety rules and dividing the knife and knife by neglecting safety rules.