손해배상(산)
1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) is the father of C, and the Appointed Party B (hereinafter “Appointed”) is the mother of C.
B. On March 2, 2009, the circumstances of the instant death incident C entered the game production program in the Defendant Neow Game Business (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) and was working for the program A1 project of the headquarters (hereinafter “instant project”) as E of the production headquarters (hereinafter “instant project”), and committed suicide on March 8, 2012, when around 10:00, by reporting to the Defendant Company’s apartment located in the Defendant Company located in the Dong-dong, Seo-gu, Seonam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City.
(hereinafter “instant death incident” and “the network C” refers to the network). 【No dispute exists, the entry of evidence Nos. 1-2 and 1-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The parties' assertion;
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 Deceased, while working in the Defendant Company, was subject to excessive work and pressure on performance for the following reasons: (a) due to occupational stress, etc., resulting in suicide after the occurrence of a mental disorder, such as depression; and (b) the Defendant Company knew or could have known of the circumstances, such as serious decrease in the weight of the body, etc. due to occupational stress, and thus, did not take appropriate measures even though it could have sufficiently predicted the occurrence of the instant death accident.
① From March 2010, the Defendant Company transferred its office from Gangnam-gu Seoul Samsungdong to Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul to get off and off a distance exceeding three hours, the Deceased sent physical way to and from work for a distance exceeding three hours.
② The Deceased had experienced two projects failure before being responsible for the instant project, and accordingly, he was in charge of the instant project, and he saw pressure on performance and fear of leaving office due to the failure of the project.
In fact, the project of this case is around June 2012.