손해배상(기)
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 48,768,125 with respect to the Plaintiff and the period from December 2, 2012 to November 10, 2016.
1. Basic facts
A. Defendant Hax C&C Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Haxex”) subcontracted to Defendant C&C Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C&C”) KRW 57,00,000 of the construction cost on November 20, 2012 while entering into a contract for the Hux C&C Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant construction”).
B. On December 2, 2012, when the Plaintiff worked as the field manager of the Defendant COSk’s instant construction site, the Plaintiff anticipated the Plaintiff’s body on the vision installed at the construction site to set up the work line while installing a lighting line for night work at the construction site of the instant construction site, but was separated from the contact part of the rainline, resulting in an accident of falling into the floor because a section of the rain pipe collapses.
(hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). The instant accident suffered injury, such as the 3rd Crossing of the left-hand side, the 3rd west of the left-hand side, the 4rd ridge of the left-hand side, the upper-hand side of the 5th divers of the water, the upper-hand side of the 5th divers of the water.
C. According to the guidelines for the installation and use of an official rain gauge determined by the Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency pursuant to Chapter 7 (Non-Limit) of Part I of the Rules on Industrial Safety and Health, the official rain gauge assembled the pipe by using a refinite or connected steel (cl.m.). After the assembly is completed, bad weather ends every day, and before the start of the operation, it is required to check the definite of the connecting or connecting part of the non-intersection, damage or corrosion of the connecting part of the connecting part of the non-intersection, and damage or corrosion of the connecting part of the connecting part of the non-intersection. The non-limit causing the accident of this case was placed in a state where the non-intersection was used without using a din light on the connecting part of the non-intersection pipe, and the part where the plaintiff expected the body in the course of the operation was separated from the above connected part of the plaintiff, thereby falling into the floor of the plaintiff.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 7, 8, and Eul evidence No. 1.