logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2019.02.20 2016가단230163
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 9,371,254 as well as 5% per annum from January 17, 2014 to February 20, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

가. 피고는 알루미늄 샷시 등을 제조판매하는 회사이고, 원고는 2014. 1. 2.부터 피고 회사에서 일용직으로 근무하던 사람이다.

B. On January 17, 2014, the Plaintiff, together with two other figures, was engaged in the work of pushing and moving the lending and borrowing (hereinafter “the lending and borrowing of this case”) in which the completed goods were loaded at the front end of the Defendant’s factory building (hereinafter “the instant lending and borrowing”) in his/her hand, and the lending and borrowing took place in excess of the lending and borrowing price (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

C. The Plaintiff suffered injury, owing to the instant accident, at least 2, 3, 4, and 5 parts of the upper right part of the pelvis.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 5 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by adding up the facts of recognition of liability as above and Eul evidence 2, testimony of a witness C, and the results of the examination of some parties concerned to the defendant representative director, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the above accident, since the defendant is found to have violated its duty to protect the plaintiff by taking measures such as allowing the plaintiff, a father under his control, to move finished goods so that the plaintiff does not harm the body during his work so that he could not cause harm to the body during his work, or by using the lending and borrowing, at least by maintaining the marina floor and increasing the number of persons transporting the above lending and borrowing.

In other words, even if the plaintiff was employed by D who operated the manpower office, the plaintiff was under the direction and supervision of the head of the factory, who is an employee of the defendant's factory at the time of the accident.

② In relation to the occurrence of the above accident, the above witness at the time of the above accident, "the front end floor of the above factory was cut, and the above lending wheels was left at the corner.

arrow