beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.04.29 2019나59928

구상금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the judgment against the Defendants exceeding the money ordered to be paid below is revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a special corporation that performs industrial accident compensation insurance services entrusted by the Minister of Employment and Labor under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter “Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act”).

B. At around 10:35 on December 3, 2015, the net C (hereinafter “victim”) was a daily employed worker belonging to the D Association, and was loaded in order to recover rice booms, which were located on the bottom of the loading box of the FFFF vehicle (hereinafter “instant vehicle”), after completing the work of lowering rice booms in the grain storage warehouse located in Gangnam-gun, Gangnam-gun, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

However, Defendant A started the instant vehicle immediately without confirming whether the victim was on board the vehicle or not, and as a result, the victim loses the center of the body and falls into the floor of the workplace, and falls into the same month.

4. The pressure of brain pressure led to death.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

At the time of the death of the victim, there are G, children, H, I, J, and K, who are the spouse.

The Plaintiff: (a) around February 24, 2016, when the victim was involved in an accident while performing his/her duties; (b) the Plaintiff: (c) deemed the instant accident as an occupational accident; (d) determined to pay the insurance benefits of KRW 70,560; (e) KRW 63,532,580; (c) paid KRW 12,096,420 as funeral expenses around the 25th of the same month; and (d) paid a multiple amount of survivor pension to G; and (e) the amount is equivalent to KRW 131,04,563 as of the lump-sum

E. On February 16, 2016, Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”), the liability insurer of the instant vehicle, paid KRW 2,724,220 as insurance proceeds to the victim’s hospital treatment costs.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence and scope of liability for damages;

A. According to the above recognition of the occurrence of liability for damages, Defendant A, the driver of the instant vehicle, must verify whether he/she is a passenger prior to the departure of the instant vehicle.