손해배상(기)
1. The Defendant’s KRW 7,263,375 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from July 15, 2014 to August 12, 2015, and the following.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company that manufactures and sells chemical drugs, etc., and the Defendant was in charge of the manufacturing process of liquid half-yearly since December 201, 201 while working for the Plaintiff on April 2, 2001.
B. On August 16, 2013, the Defendant: (a) committed a mistake that did not lock the valve of the sulfur transfer pipe of a measurement tank connected to the sulfur acid service tank while working in a water-processing medicine factory in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, 251, in a liquid sulfur oxide manufacturing process; (b) thereby, the Defendant caused an accident that excessively injected sulfur into the reaction machine and outflow out of sulfur (hereinafter “the instant accident”).
The standard quantity of sulfurist acid to be put into the manufacturing process of the above liquid half is 3.5t, and the measurement time is required for about 10 minutes, but about 6.5t's sulfur has been put into the market over about 20 minutes at the time of the accident in this case.
C. The Plaintiff suspended the manufacturing process of liquid sulfur for 14 days as of the business day of the instant accident. D.
The Plaintiff replaced the machinery due to the instant accident, and at its expense 13,340,000 won (the reaction 8,840,000 won + the reactioner 2,500,000 won + the reactioner 2,500,000 won + the cost of self-production of the reactioner and the intersection support unit 2,00,000 won).
The Plaintiff disposed of the waste amount generated by the instant accident, and paid KRW 9,955,000 ( KRW 2,100,000 + the cost of processing waste amount + KRW 6,705,000 + the cost of disposing of waste amount + KRW 150,000 + the cost of disposing of waste amount £« 1,00,000 + the cost of preventing disasters and other expendable goods).
The Plaintiff could not use the amount equivalent to KRW 916,250 ($ 627,000 + Yellow acid 289,250) due to the instant accident.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-3, 5, 6, 13, 14, 17, 18 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The Defendant is negligent in violating the duty of care while working in the large-scale manufacturing process. Accordingly, the instant accident is attributable to this.