logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.08.18 2019가단221399
손해배상(산)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 31,278,390 as well as 5% per annum from March 6, 2017 to August 18, 2020, respectively, to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a company that engages in waste disposal business, business of manufacturing and selling aggregate, business of dismantling non-inter structure, etc.

B. Around 16:50 on March 6, 2017, the Plaintiff’s workers, including the Plaintiff, were at the Defendant’s headquarters’s head office, and there was an accident that the Plaintiff, who was on the Plaintiff’s head office, felled on the Plaintiff, by putting a consortium up with a consortium, while working on the part of the Defendant’s head office.

C. In the instant accident, the Plaintiff sustained injuries, such as cerebral typology, fluorhum bags, left-hand brush ball, left-hand brush, left-hand brush brush, and left-hand brush, and fladging flads on the left-hand left-hand side, etc.

The Plaintiff received temporary layoff benefits (from March 7, 2017 to December 31, 2018) 68,947,270 won and disability benefits 44,749,580 won.

[Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy Facts, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 3, 11, 13 (including paper numbers), purport of whole pleadings]

2. Whether liability for damages arises;

A. 1) The Defendant did not perform the Plaintiff’s duty to take safety measures as the Plaintiff’s employer. Even if there was no labor relationship, the Defendant did not take any measures to prevent safety accidents, such as abortion prevention nets, and thus is liable for damages. 2) The Defendant is merely a person who ordered C to install a consortium, and as C employs the Plaintiff, the Defendant does not fall under the Plaintiff’s employer and the business owner under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.

B. The following facts are acknowledged according to the following facts according to the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation’s reply to fact-finding by December 17, 2018, Gap evidence 10, Eul evidence 3, 7, and 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

1) The Defendant engaged in manufacturing business of general industrial machinery and equipment, mineral treatment, and handling equipment, and (c) “D” (hereinafter “C”)’s relocation and installation of Defendant factory factory labels.

arrow