beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 139,675,586 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from May 13, 2016 to January 25, 2019.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The defendant is a company manufacturing automobile parts, and the plaintiff is a victim who suffered an accident while working in presses at the place of business of the defendant company.
B. On July 2, 2015, the Plaintiff operated a 11:20 tons frame and carried out the 1110 tons hub to produce automobile accessories.
During the press process, the Plaintiff was faced with an accident in which the subsequent work operator, who was a subsequent work operator, was unsatisfying a aluminium material plate by satisfying satisfy in a lower satisfy, and then the satisfy was pushed down between the upper satisfy and the upper satisfye (hereinafter referred to as the “accident in this case”). As a result, the Plaintiff suffered an injury on the upper satisfy and the upper satisfyed satisfys at the right 2 balance, attached 3 balance cutting and dry satisfys at the third balance, 4 balance satisfy and
C. As the instant accident was recognized as an industrial accident under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, the Korea Workers’ Compensation and Welfare Service paid the Plaintiff KRW 13,816,80 of temporary layoff benefits, medical care benefit 17,946,510, and disability benefit 17,245,000, respectively.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy and described in Gap evidence 1 and 2
2. Chief;
A. At the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff was involved in the instant accident at the wind to manipulate the key so that the representative director of the Defendant Company attached to 110 tons presses does not operate the e-electronic safety device, and thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate for all the Plaintiff’s damages.
B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) is not an employer who employs the Plaintiff. The Defendant Company concluded a labor contract with Nonparty C, which is a labor contract company operated by Nonparty D, and performed the work with the Plaintiff. That is, it is not an employer who employs the Plaintiff, and thus, there is no liability for damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the instant accident. 2) The instant accident related to negligence is solely caused by the Plaintiff’s fault or by the negligence of the Defendant of the interpreter.