1. The Defendant shall start on May 23, 2016 to Plaintiff A with respect to KRW 40 million, KRW 25 million, KRW 200,000, and each of the above amounts.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition are as follows: (a) the employee of the Defendant Limited Partnership Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) established for the purpose of the steel industry and steel-frame concrete industry; (b) the employee of the Defendant Company is engaged in the business of driving the aggregate; and (c) the Defendant D is engaged in driving the Defendant Company’s employee; (d) around May 23, 2016, at around 09:55, Defendant D collected aggregate sources from the aggregate extraction located in the place where the Defendant Company is located in the location of the Defendant Company, using the clobane to transport the aggregate source located in the clopty site using the clobs; and (e) transported the 100-meter volume of tin to transport the aggregate source located in the clobs of the tin.

3) In the course of the Defendant’s work for transporting aggregate tin, the deceased was in a situation in which it was unable to see the deceased, and without confirming the location of the deceased, the deceased was buried in aggregate tin’s bomb and died on the spot by negligence by inserting aggregate bomb inside the bomb of the bomb (hereinafter “instant accident”). The Defendants were indicted by occupational negligence under this Court Decision 2016No1463 on February 8, 2017 for the instant accident, and were sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million by the Defendant Company, Defendant D was sentenced to a fine of KRW 6 million by imprisonment without prison labor, and Defendant D was appealed by this Court No. 2017No966 on February 8, 2017.

5) The Plaintiff A is the denial of the Deceased, and the Plaintiff B and C are the offspring of the Deceased. [The respective descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1 through 8 based on recognition, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]

B. According to the facts of the establishment of the liability for damages, Defendant D neglected his duty of care to safely conduct the work, such as ascertaining the location of the deceased during the work counter-satis and checking whether there is another person within the satisferer before inserting aggregate tin, or conducting the work in accordance with a separate signal number instructions. The Defendant Company caused the instant accident.