1. The Defendants are 48,497,003 won to each Plaintiff and 5% per annum from April 24, 2014 to July 12, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 14, 2011, C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) concluded a construction contract for the renovation and repair of factories in E and F in Chungcheong City, each other, engaging in construction business.

B. At around 14:30 on March 13, 201, G, an employee of E, engaged in the work of installing a water home gate with a height of 5 meters high from the ceiling to the ceiling, for the repair of a factory under the above construction contract.

C. At that time, Defendant A, a foreign worker, who operated the Macon within the above factory, moved an object through the Hoistist, did not discover any G in the direction of the process, and caused G to face the instant accident, which led G to an injury, such as kid the 2nd line in the Hastge beam of the Hoststst (H).

Defendant A is a worker employed by Defendant B (hereinafter referred to as Defendant B).

E. As an industrial accident insurer under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Industrial Accident Insurance Act”), the Plaintiff recognized the instant accident as an occupational accident of G, and paid KRW 18,86,560 of temporary disability compensation benefits, 33,726,00 of disability benefits, and 33,206,820 of medical care benefits.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence 1 through 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The Defendants’ assertion 1) At the time of the instant accident, Defendant A completed the date of the instant accident, was shut down in a dormitory, and did not have been at the scene of the accident. Therefore, the Defendants are not liable for the instant accident. (ii) Even if not bound by facts established in the judgment of other civil cases, etc. in the relevant legal doctrine, the facts established in the relevant civil case that was established in a final and conclusive civil case are significant evidence, barring special circumstances, and thus, it cannot be rejected without reasonable explanation

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da47292 delivered on June 29, 1995, and Supreme Court Decision 97Da49053 delivered on February 24, 1998, etc. 3.