beta
(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2015.11.11 2013가단25631

손해배상(산)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 36,168,01 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from January 4, 2012 to November 11, 2015, and the following.

Reasons

1. The facts of recognition revealing a civil petition filed by the Plaintiff on January 17, 201, B apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) 401 Dong 211 and 211, that the Plaintiff was unable to work for 5% on the right side due to the 401-dong 211 occupant, and the Plaintiff tried to open a opening door on the side of the entrance of the above apartment No. 401-dong 11 and check the underground drainage pipes, and fall down (hereinafter “instant accident”) with the underground floor below 20 meters or more. The instant accident led to the instant accident, the Plaintiff lost the ability to work for 54% on the two parts, brain, and the scale of the two parts due to the injury of the external trauma, the number of the parties to the instant apartment, the appraisal number No. 1 and 5 (including the appraisal number, and the purport of each of the entire court as a result of the appraisal and examination, and the purport of each court as a whole.

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant

A. 1) An employer of the relevant legal doctrine is an incidental duty under the good faith principle accompanying an employment or labor contract, and bears the duty of care or safety consideration to prepare necessary measures, such as improving a physical environment, so as not to harm life, body, and health, in the course of providing labor by an employee. In the event an employee is damaged by violating such a duty, the employer shall be liable for damages arising from nonperformance of the duty (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da12082, Feb. 23, 1999). If an employee of a third party’s place of business, who is employed by the employer of the Plaintiff, is deemed a third party’s employee, the employer may be deemed as an employee of the third party, without identity or independence of the employer, and in fact, the existence of the employee is formally and nominal, such as where the employee can be deemed as an employee of the third party.