1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 1,219,513 with respect to the Plaintiff, and 5% per annum from August 10, 2017 to July 8, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that performs industrial accident compensation insurance business entrusted by the Minister of Employment and Labor pursuant to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter “Industrial Accident Insurance Act”), and the Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) is an insurer that has concluded a construction machinery insurance contract with the Defendant B with respect to D concrete pumps (hereinafter “instant pumps”).

B. While the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) leased the instant pumps, and the F, an employee of E (hereinafter “victim”) was preparing for the snowing work from the retaining wall at the G construction site around 10:30 on April 5, 2016, Defendant A, a driver of the instant pumps, installed the instant pumps in a slope, and sprinked with the Defendant A, who was in a retaining wall, was faced with the victim who was in a retaining wall. As such, the victim suffered from the injury, such as the regradation, by leaving the retaining wall up to 3 meters away from the retaining wall.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). On the other hand, the victim was working at a place where the risk of falling is likely to fall as above and did not have safety equipment, such as safety belts.

C. The Plaintiff recognized the instant accident as an occupational accident and paid KRW 29,43,600 to the victims of temporary layoff benefits until August 9, 2017, and paid KRW 44,968,00 for disability benefits, and KRW 6,573,950 for medical care benefits.

On the other hand, Defendant C paid 12,539,760 won to the victims of treatment.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 6 (including additional numbers), Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence and scope of liability for damages;

A. According to the fact of recognition of one liability for damages, the accident in this case occurred due to negligence by Defendant A, who is the driver of the pumps in this case, and Defendant B, the owner of the pumps in this case or Defendant A.