beta
Text
1. The defendant,
A. The Plaintiff’s KRW 50,098,00 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from April 3, 2013 to May 1, 2015.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. In fact, the Defendant is a company that manufactures automobile parts, and the Plaintiff has been engaged in the production business since September 26, 201 as an employee of the Defendant.
The Plaintiff suffered injury, such as 2,3 water cutting on the right side, and 4 water duplic damage, while producing presses around 15:00 on September 13, 2012, the Plaintiff suffered from the injury of the Defendant, while he was engaged in the production of presses.
(hereinafter “instant accident”). On September 25, 2013, the Plaintiff received KRW 6,181,580 from the succeeding intervenor on September 25, 2013 due to the instant accident.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's statements in Gap's Evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Gap's evidence No. 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
(b) The recognition framework of responsibility is responsible for a high level of protection or safety consideration for workers put into work, as the nature of imposing a strong pressure on certain objects significantly high risk of safety accidents in the course of use.
However, unlike the above facts, the defendant does not seem to have sufficiently provided the plaintiff with safety education necessary for presses work, and considering the fact that safety devices to prevent accidents, such as electronic response safety devices, appear to not work normally, the defendant shall thoroughly provide the plaintiff with safety education so that part of the body can not enter the presses, and shall thoroughly guide and supervise the work process so that he can work in the safe state to the maximum extent possible, such as whether the safety devices are work in the operation of safety devices during the work, and have the duty of care to prevent safety accidents, such as the provision of necessary safety devices, even though he/she neglected to do so.
Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate for damages sustained by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case.
C. Limit of liability, however, the period of the plaintiff's work at the defendant's workplace.