1. The defendant's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The plaintiffs' lawsuit acceptance.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 29, 2013, Plaintiff A entered into an employment contract with the Defendant and engaged in steel plates processing operations at the Defendant’s workplace located in Yangsan City E.

B. At around 11:20 on June 17, 2013, Plaintiff A, who was placed on the floor of the above workplace, was subject to an accident where the two descendants are fluored by generating the operating device of the triromoer, which was set up on the floor of the above workplace.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

Plaintiff

A, due to the instant accident, received temporary layoff benefits from the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service until March 31, 2014, KRW 30,913,860, medical care benefits 11,102,410, and disability benefits 22,579,980, respectively.

On the other hand, the network B and Plaintiff C are the parents of Plaintiff A, and the network B died on August 27, 2016 and succeeded to the network B.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 2-1, 2, 3, 5-1, 4-2, 3, 5-2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4-1, 2, 5, 6, 9-2, testimony by the witness of the court of first instance and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of and limitation on liability for damages;

A. Under Article 23(1), the Industrial Safety and Health Act imposes an obligation to take safety measures to prevent risks on a business owner in carrying out his/her business. As such, an employer is a duty under the good faith principle accompanying a labor contract, and an employee bears the duty to take necessary measures, such as improving human resources and physical environment, so that it does not harm life, body, and health in the course of providing his/her labor. As such, an employer is liable to compensate for damages to an employee if the employee suffered damages due to his/her breach of such duty. (2) The following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, namely, ① the Plaintiff A was in charge of the work at the time of the instant accident, and the Plaintiff A was in charge of the work at the time of the instant accident, and it appears that the instant accident occurred in the course of arranging iron plates for the work at the time of the