beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.01.17 2018가단50827

손해배상(산) 청구의 소

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 2,500,000 as well as 5% per annum from May 28, 2016 to January 17, 2020 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On May 9, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a construction-based employment contract with the Defendant on a daily basis with the content that it is a waterproof hole of “C and D apartment” as KRW 130,000 on a day-to-day basis. On May 28, 2016, the Plaintiff suffered an injury, such as a bar-to-day cutting off and a stud-off signboard of the first floor of the apartment E-dong 3 to 4, 2016, after completing a waterproof repair work on the D apartment located in Busan-si on May 28, 2016 while getting a waterproof repair work in the D apartment at around 10:00, the Plaintiff was on the ground, getting out of the floor of the wall and getting out of the floor of the wall, and was also on the floor of the Plaintiff, and was also

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, and 7 (including number, hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. The defendant, as the plaintiff's employer, bears the duty of safety consideration and duty of safety education to maintain a physical environment so as not to harm life, body, and health in the course of providing the above labor, and to devise necessary measures, but did not take any measures, and caused the plaintiff to undergo the accident of this case by negligence not fulfilling the duty of safety education for the plaintiff and workers, so the defendant is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case.

C. The limitation of liability, however, although the plaintiff was also aware of whether the bridge was safely extended over the site and there was a duty of care to ensure the safety of the plaintiff's own, such as the plaintiff's request to take the bridge during his/her getting off, he/she neglected this duty and alone alone, and the plaintiff's error was found to have resulted in the occurrence and expansion of damages. Thus, the defendant's damages to be compensated should be considered in determining the amount of damages to be compensated.