beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s decision on performance recommendation with the executory power to claim reimbursement against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. On April 2017, the Plaintiff awarded a contract to B for the rooftop waterproof construction of the Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building on the end of April 2017.2) On April 25, 2017, the Plaintiff fell into the Defendant’s insured vehicle (D) parked on the front road of the building.
3) On June 15, 2017, the Defendant filed a lawsuit seeking reimbursement of KRW 400,000 and damages for delay with the payment of insurance proceeds of KRW 400,000,000 and KRW 400,000,000 as the reimbursement amount of KRW 2017 Ghana2561 of this Court. On June 27, 2017, the instant court rendered a decision on performance recommendation (hereinafter “decision on performance recommendation of this case”).
(B) On November 7, 2017, and became final and conclusive on November 7, 2017 (the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in Gap 1, 2, and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
B. Under a contract, a contractor is not liable for damages inflicted on a third party regarding the work, unless there is gross negligence on the contract or instruction. However, in cases where a contractor reserveds the right to direct and supervise the work progress and method and specifically directs the execution of the project, the relationship between the contractor and his/her employee does not substantially differ from the relationship between the contractor and his/her employee, and thus, the contractor cannot be exempted from the employer’s liability under Article 756 of the Civil Act for damages inflicted on a third party due to the illegal act of the contractor or his/her employee. Here, the direction and supervision should be specifically directed, supervised, and reading the operation and execution of the project to the extent that the actual employer relationship can be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da78372, Feb. 13, 2014).