손해배상(기)
1. The Defendant’s KRW 29,593,851 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from June 6, 2016 to June 11, 2019.
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. 1) The Defendant was the owner of Asan City C Ground Factory Enlargement Corporation. 2) around June 2016, the Panel Corporation was in progress among the above factory Enlargement Corporation.
On June 6, 2016, around 08:36, the Plaintiff prepared electrical construction on the roof of a building consisting of a sandd position panel among the construction sites of the above extension works, and the roof collapseed and fell below about 3 meters.
(3) The Plaintiff suffered injury to spine No. 12 due to the foregoing accident (hereinafter “instant accident”). (In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 10, 14, witness D’s testimony, and the purport of the entire pleadings.
B. The Defendant asserts that there was no contractual relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant at the time of the instant accident.
Witness
In full view of the fact that the testimony of D is not contrary to other relevant evidence, the electrical construction was planned at the time of the instant accident in the process of the said extended construction, and that the Plaintiff seems to have no reason to visit the site of the said extended construction without entering into a contract, it is reasonable to deem that the contract for the construction work was concluded between the Defendant and the Plaintiff as at the time of the instant accident.
In addition, the defendant is obligated to take safety consideration in accordance with the good faith, such as conducting safety education on the risk of accidents in the course of work as the owner and the contractual partner of the construction site, and installing appropriate safety facilities at the construction site.
However, according to the above evidence, it is recognized that safety measures have not been properly taken, such as there is no facility such as a safety net or safety log to prevent the fall at the construction site of the above extension, and the defendant neglected such safety care duty and caused the instant accident. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the instant accident.
Along with the defendant's argument, the defendant is against the plaintiff.