logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1965. 10. 19. 선고 65다1688 판결
[치료비,위자료][집13(2)민,209]
Main Issues

A contractor in so-called labor contract and the employer's liability under Article 756 of the Civil Act

Summary of Judgment

In the case of so-called labor contract which is not pure contract, the contractor is liable for compensation as the employer of this Article even though it is the contractor.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 756 of the Civil Act, Article 757 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff-Appellee

Park Jong-won

Defendant-Appellant

Maximum alcoholic beverage

Judgment of the lower court

The first instance court support for racing, Daegu District Court Decision 64Na370 delivered on June 22, 1965

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

The defendant's grounds of appeal are examined.

In general, since the contractee does not have a relationship with the direction and supervision, it is not subject to the provisions of Article 756 of the Civil Code, but is a so-called labor contract, such as ordering a specific act or contracting a specific project, even if the contractee is a so-called labor contract, it is responsible pursuant to the provisions of the employer's compensation liability. According to the facts established by the court below in this case, the non-party's choice is not based on the design which was planned in advance in the execution of the construction work of this case, and it is made a copy of the report on the structure and facilities of the bath bath in Daegu City with the defendant, and the materials required for the construction are provided from time to time by the defendant. Thus, the defendant is entrusted with the construction to the same non-party, and the construction work was implemented by supervising the same non-party or his body at the construction site from time to time, so even if the contract form was conducted, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the negligence of the non-party, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence by the court below.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Judge Do-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court

arrow
심급 사건
-대구지방법원 1965.6.22.선고 64나370
참조조문
본문참조조문