손해배상(산)
1. The Defendant’s KRW 4,624,325 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from October 15, 2014 to December 28, 2017.
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. 1) The Plaintiff, as the nationality of Pakistan, entered the Republic of Korea on June 26, 2012, and was employed as the Defendant’s employee on or around June 2012. 2) The Plaintiff suffered injury to the Plaintiff’s loss of the Plaintiff’s left hand in the course of moving the Plaintiff’s wait to the Plaintiff’s transfer and borrowing of wait in the process of moving the Plaintiff’s wait in the presence of B’s transfer and borrowing of wait around 19:20 on July 1, 2013.
(3) On October 15, 2014, the Plaintiff suffered injury (hereinafter referred to as “instant secondary accident”) on the part of the Plaintiff, at around 02:00, on the part of the Defendant, at the price per unit of the clock container operating room, the weight of the Plaintiff clocked on the clocks, and on the part of the mouths of the combination of open locks, detailed obscure entry, and open upper part of the mouths of the mouths, and loss of hacks (hereinafter referred to as “instant secondary accident”).
(4) On October 2014, the Plaintiff terminated the employment contract with the Defendant on the expiration of the employment cost, and was issued other (G-1) visa for the treatment of injury resulting from the instant secondary accident, and stayed in the Republic of Korea.
On April 7, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit identical to the instant lawsuit with the Changwon District Court Masan Branch (2016dan4788), and on September 8, 2016, the instant lawsuit was concluded on September 5, 2016 with the absence of three times, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit again on October 5, 2016.
[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, 5, Eul evidence No. 5 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above facts of recognition of liability, the defendant, as the plaintiff's employer, has a duty to provide safety care to prevent accidents through surveillance and supervision during work. Since the first and second accidents occurred due to the failure to do so, the defendant has a duty to provide safety care to the plaintiff.