1. Of the part concerning the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) who falls under the following amount ordered to pay.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 2, 2017, the Intervenor’s Intervenor selected a C fishing village fraternity as a person subject to a project to create a marine income source in front of the village in 2017, and decided to grant subsidies on March 17, 2017.

As a part of the above development project, C fishing village fraternity entered into a mid-term lease agreement with the Defendant with regard to the dredging soil transport of the D branch line in Gyeongnam-gun D (hereinafter “instant construction site”) around March 2017, with the following terms:

【Blk for inserting the picture’s inserting D E】

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to input the excavation searcher owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant excavation searcher”) at the construction site of this case, and receive KRW 400,000 per day of work, but the oil cost and transportation cost are to be borne by the Defendant.

C. From March 27, 2017, pursuant to the above contract, the Plaintiff worked as the digging pool of this case from the above construction site. The Plaintiff’s construction site of this case was put in other mid-term equipment (clater and truck) that the Defendant interfered with, and the Plaintiff performed work together with the above mid-term equipment.

The excavation of this case was buried at the construction site above while conducting work on April 1, 2017, the fiveth day of work.

(hereinafter referred to as the "accident of this case". 【No ground for recognition' exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4 through 6 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings, images, and arguments.

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is responsible for compensating the damage suffered by the accident of this case, since he was negligent in neglecting his duty of care so that the plaintiff can safely perform the excavation work, such as confirming the work site.

As to this, the plaintiff and the defendant are in a relationship between the contractor and the contractor, and the plaintiff works in an independent position as the contractor.