1. Defendant C’s KRW 24,816,375 as well as 5% per annum from November 6, 2014 to January 22, 2019.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On November 11, 2014, the Plaintiff, as an employee of Defendant B, was installed and inspected in the press machine with D’s workplace located in Busan, which was operated by Defendant C, and the gold type produced and supplied by Defendant B’s “F,” which was operated by Defendant C, the Plaintiff was cut off (hereinafter “instant accident”) by Nonparty G, an employee of Defendant C, as an employee of the Defendant C, was placed in the press machine, while the materials at the first work do not fall from gold, and forced to put the left hand between gold and forced to cut off.

【Non-contentious facts, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 5, 7, 8, Eul’s evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Defendant B and Defendant B, as the Plaintiff’s employer, requested Defendant C to verify whether the Plaintiff’s work was installed with protective devices, such as an identification safety device, etc. during the press machine in which the Plaintiff’s work is anticipated, and if there is no such protective devices, measures can be taken to prevent safety accidents, and in the absence of such devices, the Plaintiff failed to make the above request, thereby causing the instant accident. Therefore, Defendant B and Defendant B are liable for damages due to the Plaintiff’s nonperformance of the duty to compensate for damages. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the instant accident occurred due to the malfunction of protective devices or protective devices as alleged by the Plaintiff, and therefore, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit. 2) The Nonparty G installed a press machine in the instant accident and operated the press machine after checking whether the Plaintiff inspected the safe state of safety.