손해배상(산)
1. The Defendants: (a) KRW 393,456,455 to each Plaintiff; and (b) KRW 5% per annum from April 9, 2013 to August 26, 2016.
1. Basic facts
A. The plaintiff in the status of the party is below.
Defendant B is an employee who suffered industrial accident as described in the port, and is engaged in the manufacturing business of labels, etc. with the trade name “E,” and Defendant C is a person who has been engaged in the external construction business, construction materials construction business, wholesale and retail business, etc. in the name of “G” from Ansan-si.
B. On April 9, 2013, the Plaintiff suffered industrial accident (hereinafter “Industrial Accident”) is the Board Work (hereinafter “the Board Work”) among the E plant remodeling works directly operated by Defendant B on or around April 9, 2013.
(A) An accident that falls off on a bridge with a height of 30 cm from the 1m and 30cm (hereinafter “instant accident”) while entering the site and staying scam on the wall to the scam on the wall.
2) At the time of the instant accident, at the site of the headquarters of the instant case, safety equipment for the prevention of workers’ fall was not installed at all at the site of the headquarters of the instant case, and safety equipment for the prevention of workers’ fall was not installed, and regular safety education or daily safety education was not conducted to confirm whether safety equipment was installed, and to enhance safety awareness. In addition, safety education was not provided every day, and safety education was not provided to confirm whether safety equipment for the prevention of workers’ fall, such as regular safety education or daily work.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 is that Defendant C contracted with Defendant B to perform the instant printing team construction work by inserting H and Plaintiff, etc. In the process, Defendant C breached his duty of care as an employer to take preventive measures against fall, and thus, Defendant C caused the instant accident.