logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 원주지원 2017.02.09 2015가단36500
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,578,207 with respect to the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from November 3, 2014 to February 9, 2017.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) The Plaintiff is a person operating D who manufactures and sells a chickens in the Republic of Korea. The Defendant was working in D from August 5, 2014 to November 3, 2014. 2) While the Plaintiff was working in D on November 3, 2014 in the process of forming a chickens by laying the steel net with a press machine installed at D’s plant on November 3, 2014, the Plaintiff suffered injury to the left part of the press machine, as the Plaintiff’s left hand entered into the press machine, by dividing the press machine into the press machine, the Plaintiff’s left hand was divided into the press machine, the upper part of the upper part of the left part, the upper part of the upper part, the upper part of the 2, 3, 4 resin cutting, the upper part of the 5 balance of the left part, the cutting of the upper part of the 5 balance, the opening part of the upper part of the 5 balance, and the damage to the left part.

(3) Since the presses that the Plaintiff used for the work to make the chickenss are dangerous machinery that may cause harm to human body during the operation process, the operator of the business entity engaged in the work by using the presses machinery has a duty to provide education so that he/she can safely operate the machinery and to take measures to prevent safety accidents, such as providing safety devices, etc. Nevertheless, the Defendant, who puts the Plaintiff into the presses machinery using the presses machinery, did not provide any particular education for the prevention of safety accidents, and did not install safety devices for the prevention of safety accidents (e.g., devices that prevent the operation of the presses machinery when he/she gets into the work).

[Grounds for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1, the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above recognition of the Defendant’s liability for damages, the instant accident is an operator of a business using press machinery that may cause the Defendant’s safety accident, as seen earlier.

arrow