Where the contractor supervises the work of the contractor, the contractor's liability for the illegal acts of the contractor shall be applied.

When the contractor causes damage to a third party on the date of receipt of the contract, the contractor's liability for the employer is limited to the case where the contractor has reserved the specific direction and supervision right on the progress and method of the contractor's work, and it does not fall under the case where the contractor simply checks whether the degree of the operation and execution of the project is being implemented in accordance with the design plan or specifications and supervises the process, etc.

Article 757 of the Civil Act

Seoul High Court Decision 83Meu1153 decided Nov. 22, 1983 (No. 31) (Gong35, No. 720ho101)

No. 4 others

Dredging Works

Busan District Court (84Gahap353)

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The original judgment shall be revoked.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff Appellant the amount of 9,535,944 won, the amount of 1,000,000 won, the amount of 50,000 won with vibration, the amount of 50,000 won per annum from March 17, 1983 to the date of the sentence of the original judgment, and the amount of 25,000 won per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

The judgment that the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by both the first and second instances and a provisional execution declaration.

In full view of Gap evidence Nos. 3 (the same shall apply to evidence Nos. 7-2) and evidence Nos. 7-1 of the court below's evidence Nos. 7-1 and the whole purport of the testimony and pleading of the witness of the court below, the non-party Nos. 3 (the same shall apply to the evidence No. 7-2 of the court below) who repair the ship, etc. with the name of the defendant company after receiving a contract from the defendant company for dredging agencies and electrical repair works for the dredging Seoul, which is owned by the defendant company, and give a subcontract to a new-term industry company to which the plaintiff's appeal is made, during the dredging work performed at the dredging line, while the plaintiff's appeal is repaired at the dredging line, the non-party Nos. 3 (a) and Nos. 7-1 of the court below's testimony and pleading Nos. 7-1 of the court below's judgment below, the plaintiff suffered an excellent 100% of the above boom of the plaintiff's 100th.

The plaintiffs' representative is that the above sub-contractor's construction of the above sub-contractor's vessel is no longer than 1 meter high, so the above sub-contractor's construction of the above sub-contractor's vessel's above repair work is no more than 70 to 800 square meters, so it is likely that the above sub-contractor's construction of the above sub-contractor's vessel's repair work will be ordered to repair the above sub-contractor's new repair work to the extent that the above sub-contractor's construction of the above sub-contractor's new repair work would not be responsible for the above non-party's repair work. Thus, even if the non-party's construction of the above sub-contractor's new repair work did not cause any damages to the non-party's owner's new repair work, the above sub-contractor's construction of the above sub-contractor's new repair work to the extent that the non-party's construction of the above sub-contractor's new repair work would not be responsible for the above non-party's construction work.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims in this case based on the premise that the defendant company is the owner of the above vessel and is responsible for the defect in the installation and preservation of the above vessel, or that the above non-party's employer is responsible for the above non-party's non-party's damages are no longer reasonable. Thus, the court below's judgment is just in this conclusion and the plaintiffs' appeal against this is unfair, so all of them are dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the application of Articles 95, 89, and 93 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to

Judges Lee Dong-sung (Presiding Judge)