beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 42,605,263 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from August 11, 2016 to April 18, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a public corporation established pursuant to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter “Industrial Accident Insurance Act”) and entrusted with the industrial accident compensation insurance business by the Minister of Employment and Labor, and the Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to A excavation vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).
B. B (hereinafter referred to as “B”) on April 2, 2014, under the employment of Clusian Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) and performed the work of managing and supervising the removal site of C in the Silus City.
On April 20, 2014, at around 16:15, the victim passed a slope in order to collect scrap metal between construction waste concrete at the site of removal. In addition, the accident was caused by the accident where the driver of the defendant vehicle E, who was working next to the victim, did not discover the victim and took the right edge of the victim at the end of the wind, and the accident was caused by the accident where the driver of the victim took the right edge of the victim (hereinafter “accident”).
In the accident of this case, the victims suffered injuries, such as the opening of the pelvis, which is accompanied by the right pelvis, damage to the pelvis on the right pelvis, etc.
C. By August 10, 2016, the Plaintiff recognized the instant accident as an industrial accident, and paid 139,292,180 won, including 58,070,970 won as temporary layoff benefits, 62,877,110 won as medical care benefits, and 16,07,950 won as disability benefits.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Occurrence and scope of liability for damages;
A. According to the above facts, the accident of this case is deemed to have been caused by the breach of duty of safe driving by the driver of the defendant vehicle. Thus, the defendant who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle is liable to compensate for the loss suffered by the victim due to the accident of this case.
(ii)Provided, That this radius is such as refraters even in the case of victims;