손해배상(기)
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. The Defendant alleged the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim: (a) ordered D operators; (b) ordered E to replace a tent with materials or storage tent with a height of eight meters without safety measures; and (c) on March 24, 2015, the occurrence of an accident in which E dies by tearing into the floor.
(hereinafter referred to as “E.” Since the above accident occurred due to the Defendant’s failure to fulfill the minimum safety devices and management obligations, the Defendant is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff A and B for the damage caused by the death of the deceased, who is the inheritor of the deceased.
2. In principle, a contractor does not have a duty of care to take safety measures necessary for the prevention of accidents in connection with the contractor's work, but has a duty of care to take safety measures necessary for the prevention of accidents in special circumstances, such as the contractor's duty of management and supervision in relation to the contractor's work or the contractor's specific direction and supervision in relation to the contractor's work.
(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da53086 delivered on April 25, 1997, etc.). In full view of each of the statements in the evidence Nos. 6 and 7, the Defendant: (a) contracted to “F” as construction cost of KRW 3.5 million; (b) the Deceased (spouse in a de facto marital relationship with G), who is the actual operator of the above F, was engaged in repair work for the warehouse tent of D with three employees on March 24, 2015; (c) the Defendant was not at the work site at the time of the above accident; and (d) the Defendant did not give specific instructions on work through the Defendant’s agent; and in this case, it can be acknowledged that the Defendant and the Deceased did not give specific instructions on the work.