1. The judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a company engaging in landscaping construction business, etc., and the Plaintiff A was employed by the Defendant from January 2014 to conduct farm management business, including the first work, and the Plaintiff B’s spouse, Plaintiff C, and D are children of Plaintiff A.

나. 원고 A은 피고의 지시에 따라 2014. 9. 18. 13:00경 익산시 F 소재 G 농장에서 예초기를 이용한 제초작업을 하고 있었는데, 원고 A의 뒤에서 역시 예초작업을 준비하던 피고 소속 근로자 E이 다루던 예초기의 작업봉과 칼날이 함께 순간적으로 튕겨 나와 원고 A의 양쪽 종아리 뒷부분을 가격하였고, 이로 인하여 원고 A은 우측 하지 슬관절 아래 절단, 좌측 경골 및 심부비골 신경 손상 등의 상해를 입었다

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

At the time of the instant accident, five employees, including the Plaintiff E and A, engaged in the work in charge of each of the Defendant’s pre-service while using one of the pre-services owned by the Defendant, and there was no particular supervisor of pre-service, and the Defendant did not conduct safety education against its employees regarding the pre-service use of pre-services.

Plaintiff

A receives temporary disability compensation benefits from September 18, 2014 to April 7, 2016, with the period of medical care determined by the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service, from September 18, 2014, in which the period of medical care was paid KRW 31,422,060, medical care benefits60, and KRW 64,681,550, and received disability benefits in the form of a pension. This is when converting it into lump-sum disability compensation benefits in accordance with the disability benefit table in attached Table 2 of Article 57(2) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act in the form of a pension, 100,379,791 won (=the average wage finally applied 86,908.91 x 1,15

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry and video of evidence Gap 1, 6, and 8, testimony of witness E of the first instance court, purport of whole pleading

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the above facts of recognition 1 of the establishment of liability, the accident of this case is the worker E of the defendant who works together with the plaintiff A.