logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.02.12 2018가합107798
구상금
Text

1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 363,055,158 with respect to the Plaintiff, and the period from December 5, 2019 to February 12, 2020.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Status 1 of the parties concerned) The Plaintiff is the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter “Industrial Accident Insurance Act”).

D) as an employee of E Co., Ltd., a corporation performing industrial accident compensation insurance services entrusted by the Minister of Employment and Labor; and D) as an employee of E Co., Ltd., a Foldo passenger car (hereinafter “instant passenger car”).

(2) Defendant B is the owner of the instant vehicle. (2) Defendant B is a corporation established for the purpose of acting driving business, etc. (However, it was dissolved pursuant to Article 520-2(1) of the Commercial Act on December 3, 2018; hereinafter “Defendant B”); Defendant A is a substitute driver who entered into an employment contract with Defendant B and drives the instant vehicle; Defendant B is the insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract for the instant vehicle, and Defendant B’s subsidiary C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) is the insurer who entered into the automobile insurance contract for the instant vehicle and the agent driver who would compensate others for damages caused by the operation of the vehicle.

B. (1) On November 13, 2015, D participated in the workshop and meeting held by E, a company in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seoan-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul. The other workers belonging to the above company were recruited by Defendant A as a proxy driver of D. Defendant A. (2) around 23:50 on the same day, Defendant A driven the instant car and driven the instant car to H from the distance of the sports complex.

At the time, night and rained, and the air-way of the glass was flicked by the air-way, but Defendant A did not remove the air-way of the glass properly, and Defendant A, by negligence, did not remove the air-way of the glass, sent the said car to the port by shocking the front part of the instant car, thereby getting the said car to the port, and thereby on the top of the operation of the said car.

arrow