1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff’s spouse deceased on August 30, 2018, who was employed by the Plaintiff’s assertion and engaged in principal works (hereinafter “the deceased”). The deceased’s death was caused by the Defendant’s violation of the duty of safety consideration to prevent accidents by taking necessary measures to ensure the safety of workers, or due to defects in the construction and preservation of the structure owned and occupied by the Defendant. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, the inheritor of the deceased, the amount of KRW 144,671,733, a solatium, KRW 50,000,000, KRW 219,671,733, and KRW 50,000,000, KRW 500,000 for funeral expenses, and damages for delay calculated from August 30, 2018, where the deceased died.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of violation of the duty of safety consideration, an employer is an incidental duty under the good faith principle accompanying a labor contract, and an employee bears the duty of protection or safety consideration to devise necessary measures, such as improving the human and physical environment, so as not to harm life, body, or health, in the course of providing labor. In the event that an employee suffers damage by violating such duty, an employer is liable for compensating for such damage. However, in order for the employer to recognize liability for damages, the accident not only has relations with the employee’s work but also can be predicted or predicted that the accident normally may occur. The predictability should be determined by taking into account the time, place, circumstances surrounding the accident, and other various circumstances.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da44506, Sept. 28, 2006). According to Gap’s statements on evidence Nos. 3 through 6, 9, 10, and 11, and witness D’s testimony, the deceased, who is the deceased, is working at the Defendant’s workplace from August 21, 2018, and coming from melting sea.