1. The Defendant’s KRW 104,610,930 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from April 27, 2017 to July 3, 2019, and the following.

The defendant is a company that has been awarded a subcontract for the C business in 2017 from the Jeonnam-gun, and the plaintiff is an employee of the defendant.

피고의 직원 D는 2017. 4. 27. 09:20경 전남 화순군 E 소재 C사업 현장에서 원고와 2인 1조로 풀베기 작업을 하던 중, 예초기 샤프트가 덩쿨에 걸리자 이를 끊기 위하여 좌우로 흔들다가 덩쿨이 끊어짐에 따라 반동에 의하여 예초기 샤프트가 뒤쪽으로 돌아가게 되면서 예초기 칼날로 인근에서 작업 중이던 원고의 좌측 뒤쪽 허벅지를 충격하여 원고로 하여금 좌측 대퇴부 후방부 열상, 좌측 좌골신경 손상 등의 상해를 입게 하였다

(hereinafter “the instant accident”). At the time of the instant accident, the Defendant did not provide safety education, such as explaining the matters of caution at the time of grassing work.

[Ground of recognition] According to the above facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 (including a branch number if a branch number exists; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap evidence Nos. 2, the witness testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case as a user of D.

On the other hand, the above evidence limits the scope of the defendant's liability in light of the above legal principles, since the plaintiff knew that D, working in the surroundings, was engaged in grass beer work using the prestigious machine, and thus, the defendant's liability is limited in light of this legal principles. However, considering all circumstances shown in the argument in this case, it is reasonable to view the plaintiff's negligence ratio as 30%. Thus, the defendant's liability scope is limited to 70%.

In addition to the matters to be separately explained below the scope of liability for damages, it shall be the same as each relevant item of the attached Table of the calculation of damages, and the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but it shall be less than the last month and less than KRW.