beta
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2017.12.21 2017가합100283

손해배상(기)

Text

1. As to the Plaintiff B’s KRW 133,048,485, Plaintiff C’s KRW 83,698,90, and each of the said money, the Defendant began on June 21, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The parties 1) The defendant was incorporated into E on October 17, 1969 and converted into FF corporation on February 23, 197 and then changed into the current trade name on December 29, 199 (hereinafter “the defendant”), regardless of the change of trade name.

on October 1969, the change is made to Gdong-gu Busan Metropolitan City (after the year Gdong; hereinafter the same shall apply).

) Factories producing asbestos products on the H’s ground (hereinafter “instant asbestos plant”).

A) A newly built asbestos plant from December 1969 to manufacturing asbestos products, such as asbestos yarn, asbestos capture, asbestos tape, asbestos log, etc., was closed on March 26, 1990. After that, the asbestos plant was removed from mass acid and was suspended from manufacturing asbestos products until March 26, 2006. (2) The network A was born first and resided in the Busan Eastdong-gu J, etc. (within about 1 km distance from the asbestos plant in this case) around the asbestos plant in this case from around that time to December 29, 2003. (3) The Plaintiff B was the wife of the network and the Plaintiff C’s children.

B. 1) The asbestos processing plant in this case has been known as the asbestos processing plant in this case where the number of workers and production had been the largest among the asbestos processing plant in Korea so far. 2) The Defendant produced asbestos products from December 1969 to March 26, 199, and among them, at least 1,515 employees were employed in the asbestos processing plant in this case.

3. In the inside of the asbestos plant of this case, asbestos dust was scattered at all times because it was not properly installed or operated, and asbestos dust dust was stored near the asbestos plant of this case, and asbestos dust was sunk down even around the asbestos plant of this case in the 1970s.

Although the asbestos plant in this case has a gradic facility, it was found that the gradic facility was not operated, and the gradic facility was located.