1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the subsequent order of payment shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. From May 20, 201, the Plaintiff of Pakistan’s nationality provided labor under the employment of the Defendant Seongdong-si Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) established for the purpose of the electronic parts manufacturing business, etc.

B. On March 2, 2014, at around 16:20 on March 2, 2014, the Plaintiff suffered from the 3 balance of raw clurgs and cut trigrams and cut trigrams of the left hand by cutting off all of the clurgs and opening a cover to remove the clurgs in the curgs.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

With respect to the instant accident, the Plaintiff received 30,143,290 won in total, including 10,67,210 won of temporary layoff benefits, 3,266,110 won of medical care benefits, and 16,19,970 won of disability benefits.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 6 evidence, Eul evidence 3 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. An employer of liability for damages bears the duty to maintain a physical environment and take necessary measures so that an employee does not harm life, body, or health during the course of providing his/her service. Such duty of protection is an incidental duty recognized by the good faith principle, taking into account the characteristics of the relevant employment contract, and an employer who violates such duty is liable for tort liability against an employee.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 96Da53086 delivered on April 25, 1997, and 200Da7301 delivered on November 26, 2002, etc.). According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the fact that the Defendant Company provided safety and health education and provided teaching materials for safety education in the industry safety manufacturing industry translation into Pakistan can be acknowledged.

However, the following circumstances, which can be recognized by the aforementioned evidence, Eul's statement of No. 7 and the purport of the whole pleadings, namely, the defendant company, when cleaning mination machines, shall take the hand into the mination machine.