A. On January 18, 2018, the Defendant D Co., Ltd. with respect to the Plaintiff A’s KRW 41020,000 and this amount.

A. (1) The status of the party concerned 1) Plaintiff B’s spouse, Plaintiff C’s children, and Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D”) concluded an employment contract with Plaintiff A on July 8, 2010, and Defendant E Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant E”) was dispatched to Plaintiff A in accordance with the agreement with Defendant D.

B. At around 09:00 on January 4, 2014, Plaintiff A demanded F, an employee of Defendant E, who was driven by cler at Defendant E’s factory, to suspend the operation of cler together with G for the prevention and check of clers. 2) G Plaintiff identified that the operation of clers was suspended and then it did not bring about clers necessary for the prevention and check immediately before clers were listed, and G re-runed with clers without going through clers.

3) During the course of Plaintiff A’s being launched by halog experts on the lower side of G in order to get up the haloge first between them, the Plaintiff A suffered injury, such as an external high-level 7 meters high depending on the operation manual of all of the haloge, which felled from approximately 7 meters high, such as a haloge, an external high-level thropical typosis, an external high-level typosis, an external high-level, adembris, and a vemical vemical vemical vemical vemical vempt. (4) Plaintiff A was at intervals of not more than 10 seconds between the point and the point of time of the fall.

5 The factory of Defendant E is with a strong noise, and the operator of the cater cannot be seen as well. Defendant E attached the safety rules for maintenance of the cater in the night office after the Plaintiff’s accident. Defendant E attached “No. 2 of the safety rules for maintenance of the cater in the night office.” Unlike the previous ones, at least 5. maintenance work must recover the cateror at least and 6. other workers.”