1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 137,464,680 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from May 22, 2012 to July 22, 2016.

A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of carrying out elevator, escalator, parking machine manufacturing, inspection, etc., and the Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant from February 201 to engage in elevator maintenance and repair work.

B. On May 22, 2012, the Plaintiff received the direction of C, who is an employee of the Defendant, and from around May 2, 2012, around Busan Metropolitan City Shipping Daegu D apartment (hereinafter “D apartment”), performed the work to remove protective vinyl films attached to the elevator using the ravia excessive (explic and inflammable liquid) with the network E, who is an employee of the same fee.

(C) The above work is the method of removing vinyl by grabing it on the plastic film for protection by putting the grabroke in a powder and removing it by grabing it after approximately one minute of it.

On May 2, 2012, around 15:55, the Plaintiff and the deceased E were engaged in the work of moving the Gravia knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin kn in D apartment C-dong knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin knin

During the instant accident, the deceased on May 26, 2012, while being being treated by the deceased E due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered images (78% out of the surface) on the telegraph, such as face, hand, body leg, leg, etc.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, the result of the court's commission of physical examination of Busan University Hospital, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The plaintiff alleged that the accident of this case occurred while he was engaged in the work of moving the Ravia knb to an inorganic unit from D apartment C-dong 2nd underground floor material storage, while the accident of this case occurred, while the defendant asserted that the accident of this case occurred in the above material storage, it is rather that the plaintiff was claiming that the accident of this case was the accident of this case. Thus, we first examine the causes of accident.

Gap evidence 4, 9, 10, and Gap evidence 11.