Cases where liability for damages is exempted due to an accident caused by negligence of a victim.

When cleaning dusts of the electric power distribution board, the remaining electricity is extinguished by blocking all of them, and it is confirmed that the remaining electricity is extinguished, and the accident that occurred due to the combination of dusts with the upper part of the electric power distribution board because the dust is turned into a service for blocking the electric power distribution without blocking all of them even if safety education was received to use the inhaled dust dust lawsuit.

Article 396 of the Civil Act; Article 750 of the Civil Act; Article 763 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff 1 and one other

Hyundai Construction Corporation

Seoul Civil History District Court (80 Gohap1579)

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The original judgment shall be revoked.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 an amount of 13,429,412 won, 6,964,706 won to the plaintiff 2, and an amount of 5% per annum from January 22, 1980 to the date of full payment.

The costs of lawsuit shall be assessed against the defendant and a declaration of provisional execution, which shall be assessed against all of the first and second trials.

The facts that the deceased non-party 1 died on January 21, 1980 are without dispute between the parties and without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2 (labor contract), Gap evidence 3-1 through 3 (worker's death report, etc.), and the testimony of non-party 2 of the court below on January 13, 1979, the above non-party deceased concluded a labor contract between the defendant company and the defendant company for employment in the construction site of Surdilavia, the construction site of the defendant company for 50 weeks, and the non-party 1 left the country on February 2 of the same year with the order of cleaning work of the non-party 3, the president of the working party at the Nurian base, and the fact that the non-party 1 died on January 19, 1980 and the non-party 2 was removed from the air of the plaintiff 1's Yu-7 (Ju-7) building at the bar, and the plaintiff 1's air was removed from the air of the above non-party 1.

The plaintiffs, as the cause of the above accident, are the first instance court's order to shut down electric power 1,50 meters away from the above construction site of the above accident and to clean up the electric power distribution board using the above 1,00 meters away from the above construction site of the building, and it is hard to recognize the risks of cleaning up the above 1,50 meters away from the above construction site of the above 1,50 meters away from the above construction site of the electric power distribution, and it is hard to recognize that the above non-party 3's order to shut down the electric power distribution team at the risk of cleaning and cleaning without all of the above construction site of the non-party 4, and there is no need to automatically shut down the electric power distribution system's upper end of the above construction site of the first instance court's order to shut down the electric power distribution team's 1,00 meters away from the above construction site of the non-party 3, and thus, the defendant's assertion that there is no possibility of damages to each of the above plaintiffs' evidence.

According to the above facts of recognition, when the above non-party deceased, who is an electrical engineer, clean the electric power distribution board, the fact that the above non-party deceased caused the above accident by the negligence of cleaning by using the eromeric with no safety rules and without blocking all of them can be recognized.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims of this case based on the premise that the above accident occurred due to the negligence of the defendant's employee or the defect in the installation and preservation of the structure shall be dismissed as they were attached to the fact that there is no reason to consider the damages, etc., and the judgment of the court below which concluded this conclusion is just and without merit, and the plaintiffs' appeal shall be dismissed as it is so decided as per Disposition with the burden of the losing plaintiffs.

Judge Lee Jae-hee (Presiding Judge)