logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.12.13 2017가단73454
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 50,926,358 to the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from May 7, 2014 to December 13, 2018.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

가. 인정사실 1) 피고 C은 순천시 D에서 ‘E’를 운영하면서 위 영업장에 놀이기구인 ‘F’(일명: 디스코 팡팡, 이하 ‘이 사건 놀이기구’라 한다

(2) On May 7, 2014, Defendant B continued to operate the said play equipment, and the Plaintiff suffered from the diversity of the left-hand executives in need of approximately 10 weeks’ medical treatment due to the operation of the said play equipment. Around 17:40 on May 7, 2014, the Plaintiff suffered from the diversity of the diversity of the left-hand executives, who were in need of medical treatment for about 10 weeks.

(3) The gameland in which the instant play equipment was established is a general amusement facility business site, and a safety manager permitted by the competent authority is not assigned at the time of the instant accident. Defendant C did not assign a safety manager at the time of the instant accident. Defendant C was indicted as a crime of injury by occupational negligence under the court No. 2014Da1585 in relation to the instant accident and was sentenced on March 26, 2015, Defendant B was sentenced to two years of suspended execution in June, and Defendant C was sentenced to six months of imprisonment without prison labor.

The appellate court (Seoul District Court 2015No829) reversed the judgment of the first instance court in consideration of the circumstances agreed with the plaintiff and sentenced the defendant C to a fine of KRW 5 million, which became final and conclusive.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including a provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Defendant B did not take such measures as suspending the operation of the above play devices and confirming the status of the Plaintiff, even though the Plaintiff, who was aboard the play equipment of this case, complained of the pain after setting the safety rod.

In addition, Defendant C has generated anti-dynamics like the instant play equipment.

arrow