It shall not be possible to offset the negligence by engaging in simple labor and having no responsibility for facilities concerning security measures.

It cannot be said that the luminous part is engaged in simple labor, and there is no responsibility for the installation of security arrangement, so it cannot be said that the negligence can not be offset.

Article 763 of the Civil Act, Article 396 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff 1 and 7 others

Korea Coal Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 69Na1859 delivered on April 16, 1970, Seoul High Court Decision 69Na1859 delivered on April 16, 1970

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs' attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.

Even if a vessel engaged in simple labor in a mine is deemed dangerous if it is deemed that the place of one’s work is in danger unless the security facility is installed, if a vessel is deemed to be in danger, it shall be deemed that a security officer would take measures to prevent danger, or if a vessel is capable of simply taking measures to prevent danger after taking such preventive measures, if an accident occurs due to the relationship between a security officer and his/her work (a competition with the negligence of a security officer in his/her duty to take security measures) and the occurrence of the damage, it shall be necessary to take into account the above negligence in calculating the amount of damage incurred to the mine department. The foregoing negligence in the light panel shall be considered in calculating the amount of damage caused by the accident. Under the above view of the court below, it shall not be deemed that a comparative negligence cannot be said that there is no facility liability for security measures because the vessel is engaged in simple labor and there is no facility liability for security measures. Under the above view of the court below, there is no error in the finding of the facts or the selection of evidence by the court below.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Nabri-dong and Dobri-Jaking Hanwon