logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.02.03 2014가단104176
손해배상(산)
Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff A to KRW 16,770,268, and KRW 1,500,000 and each of the said amounts.

Reasons

1. Facts recognized;

A. On August 29, 2011, E awarded a contract for a factory building and floor removal construction project located in the Daegu Northern-gu, Daegu-gu (hereinafter “instant construction project”) from Jinsung, Inc., for the construction cost of KRW 198 million. On August 30, 2011, E entered into a contract with the Defendant global environment (hereinafter “Defendant global environment”) for the entire instant construction project at KRW 71,50,000 (the construction cost of KRW 180,000 to KRW 190,000,000 or KRW 190,000,000).

B. On September 6, 2011, Plaintiff A, while conducting the process of removing the roof of the panel at the construction site of this case, felled with the floor below 6 meters from the wind, and thereby suffered injury, such as mination and mination of the top executive members.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

Plaintiff

B is the spouse of the plaintiff A.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6, 14, 15, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The Defendants’ assertion related to the instant construction works (1) asserts that Defendant global environments and Defendant C provided the instant construction works from Defendant C to Dong business, and that Defendant C provided the instant construction works for re-subcontracting to Defendant D, and that Defendant C claimed compensation for damages arising from the instant accident against the Defendants. On the other hand, Defendant C asserted that it was merely the introduction of each contract between E and Defendant global environment, Defendant global environment, Defendant global environment, and Defendant D to enter into a contract for the purpose of acquiring and selling the water discharged from the instant construction site, and Defendant D merely introduced the panel removal works to purchase the removed panel at the site of the instant construction site and to introduce the panel removal works.

Therefore, we first examine the status of the Defendants related to the instant construction work.

(2) The judgment of the court below is examined. A.

arrow