1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition and modification as follows, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

"21:50" shall be inserted after July 3, 2013 in the second 9th of the first instance judgment.

The 2nd and 13th of the first instance judgment shall be amended as follows:

The defendant, as an employer, shall conduct safety education in ordering workers to work, check the working environment of workers at any time to check whether business facilities operate normally, whether workers observe safety regulations, etc. In particular, anti-saturcing machinery is obliged to maintain and manage the machinery more thoroughly and to maintain and manage the machinery to ensure its normal operation, in consideration of the fact that there is a high risk of safety accidents due to its characteristics.

The defendant is liable for compensating the plaintiff for all damages caused by the accident in this case, since the defendant committed an act of care in violation of such duty of care.

In the 6th judgment of the court of first instance, the "statement of calculation of damages" shall be amended by the attached Form of calculation of damages.

Part 3 of the judgment of the first instance is amended " September 30, 2014" in Part 19 as " December 15, 2013", and the part 20 " October 1, 2014" as " October 16, 2013."

Part 3 of the judgment of the first instance shall be revised to "123,922,024 won [104,160,387 won [104,167 won for lost income during the period of suspension of business (19,629,80 won for lost income) 19,761,637 won after the period of suspension of business] of 130,640,02 [104,160,387 won for lost income after the period of suspension of business] of 123,92,024 [19,761,637 won for lost income during the period of suspension of business (10,629,80 won for lost income)];

Part 4 of the first instance judgment is amended by "1,856,982 won (19,761,637 x 0.6)" as "1,87,781 won (26,479,635 x 0.6)".

Part 4 of the first instance judgment, "15,87,781 won" shall be amended to "1,856,982 won".

2. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is justified.