beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.12 2019나32971

손해배상(기)

Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. As to the part of the underlying facts, the relevant part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination

A. At the time when Plaintiff A’s assertion was carried out the above tree removal work, the business owner or supervisor did not reside at the work site and did not take any safety measures in relation to the work, and thereby the Plaintiff A suffered a fatal injury. As such, the Defendant, to which the business owner or supervisor belongs, is liable to compensate the Plaintiffs for mental damage caused by the instant accident as consolation money.

B. Determination 1) An employer is an incidental duty under the good faith principle accompanying a labor contract, and an employee bears the duty to take necessary measures, such as improving human and physical environment, so as not to harm life, body, and health during the course of providing labor. In the event that an employee suffers damage by violating such duty of protection, barring any special circumstance, the accident is related to the employee’s work, and it should be deemed that the accident is ordinarily likely to occur. The predictability should be determined by taking into account the time, place, circumstance of the accident, and other various circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Da56734, Jul. 27, 2001; 2004Da4506, Sept. 28, 2006; 2004Da4506, Sept. 28, 2006).