logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2014.08.14 2013가단1388
손해배상(산)
Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff A is an employee of the Defendant Y&C Co., Ltd., and the Plaintiff B and C is the Plaintiff’s children; the Defendant Y&C Co., Ltd subcontracted the construction of natural gas pipelines for the section F-G located under D-G (hereinafter “instant construction”); on November 1, 201, the Plaintiff A got out of a bus excavated at the site of the instant construction project due to an accident of falling down to the excavated floor (hereinafter “instant accident”) and falling down to the excavated floor due to the end of the road excavated for pipeline work on November 1, 2011. There is no dispute between the parties concerned.

2. As the cause of the instant claim, the Plaintiffs are obligated to protect the Defendants, the employer of the Plaintiff A, by creating a safe working environment, working conditions, etc., so that they do not suffer from an accident while performing their duties, and to consider the safety thereof.

Although it is necessary to take necessary measures to prevent safety accidents, it is asserted that there was negligence that did not perform the duty to prevent the accident in this case, and that the Defendants seek compensation for the damages suffered by the Plaintiffs due to the accident in this case.

In light of the records in Gap's evidence 15, Gap's evidence 18-1, Gap's evidence 10, 16, and the CD verification result of this court, it is not sufficient to acknowledge that the defendants did not take necessary measures to prevent safety accidents at the construction site of this case at the time of the accident of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise. Rather, according to the records in Gap's evidence 5-1, Gap's evidence 7, Gap's evidence 8-1 through 6, Gap's evidence 14, and Eul's evidence 1, the accident of this case is likely to be faced with the buses going on to the road along the safety pent installed at the edge of the road excavated by the plaintiff.

arrow