Since it is the same as the statement in the claim, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether tort liability has been recognized;

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant entrusted the transportation of the cargo from CJ-based ships, which led to the transportation of the cargo of this case from CJ-based F office in Jeju-do to the Jeju-do terminal, and the vehicle necessary for the transportation of the cargo became insufficient.

In such a case, the defendant must request the supply of the vehicle suitable for the quantity of the cargo, and the accident of this case occurred with the knowledge that the vehicle's weight is five tons, despite the fact that the vehicle is not suitable for the transportation of the cargo of this case, it is necessary to refuse the vehicle or to load only the transportable quantity.

Therefore, since the defendant's breach of duty of care is the cause of the accident of this case, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for the damages suffered by the plaintiff.

B. Where a contractor and his/her employee are practically related to a contractor and his/her employee in relation to the work entrusted to the contractor, in other words, where the contractor and his/her employee are in a relationship between the contractor and the contractor and his/her employee, the contractor shall be obligated to prepare necessary measures to prevent harm to life, body, and health during the process of the work of the contractor and his/her employee. However, if the contractor and his/her employee do not have a specific right to direct and supervise the contractor and his/her employee, the contractor shall not be deemed to have a duty to provide safety consideration to the contractor and his/her employee, unless

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da57532, Nov. 27, 2001). With respect to the instant case, the health unit, the Defendant’s transportation method, and the loading of the vehicle.