beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 424,151,149 to Plaintiff A, and KRW 15,00,000 to Plaintiff B, and each of the said money.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition (1) Defendant Taesan Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Taesan Construction Co., Ltd.”) subcontracted another construction among the Newly constructed D (hereinafter “instant construction”) located in Seo-gu Daejeon Special Metropolitan City Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant construction”). From June 15, 2013, Plaintiff A worked as a concrete building hole at the instant construction site from June 15, 2013 to the instant construction site.
(2) On July 6, 2013, around 10:28, 2013, one of four vehicles (one log string (one log string) located in the G concrete pumps (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) located at the instant construction site, which was located in F, became a string of the ground. As a result, the boom booms connected with the boom boom, which fell short of the boom boom, led to the Plaintiff’s accident of shocking the head part of the Plaintiff, which was connected with the boom booms (hereinafter “instant accident”), and the Plaintiff sustained the injury, such as the damage of the boom and the damage of the booming body.
(3) Plaintiff B is the denial of Plaintiff A, and Defendant ELA Property Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant ELI”) is the insurer of the instant vehicle.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 5, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. (1) The driver of the instant vehicle had the Plaintiff A undergo the instant accident by negligence not properly doing so, even though the driver of the instant vehicle installed a wooden tree after cutting the ground ground floor at the time the vehicle site was cut down for concrete building, and installed a wooden tree after cutting down the vehicle site so as not to drive down the place where the support was lowered, and had the Plaintiff build a concrete building in a safe state.
(2) In addition, Defendant Taesan Construction does not cause industrial accidents at the site when the workers employed by the contractor as the contractor of the instant construction site as the contractor of the concrete building project.