1. The defendant and each of them shall be KRW 105,760,297 for the plaintiff A, KRW 3,000,000 for the plaintiff B, and KRW 1,500,00 for the plaintiff C, D, and E, respectively.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition 1) The Defendant was performing a new construction work of a factory in the Youngcheon-gu Industrial Complex as a company that conducts the building work business and the engineering work business. From August 11, 2014, Plaintiff A is a worker employed for work at the Defendant’s above construction site. Plaintiff B is the wife of Plaintiff A, Plaintiff C is its children, Plaintiff D and E are their parents. Plaintiff D and E are their parents. 2) On August 11, 2014, Plaintiff A around 14:30, around August 14, 2014, with Defendant F, a working group leader belonging to the Defendant at the above construction site, performed a cleaning of construction vehicles and roads in a way that Plaintiff A drives a vehicle with a high-tension straw water, water tank, power generator, gasoline, and f while driving a vehicle with a gasoline and f while drinking water.

In order to supplement water far from the water, the vehicle stopped in order to supplement water, and the generation of a flame was caused by the gasoline tank which was placed adjacent to the power generator to supplement oil of the power generator.

F He saw water to extinguish fire, and during that course, the plaintiff A saw the gasoline, and there was an accident that the plaintiff A moved the gasoline to the body of the plaintiff A.

(3) In the instant accident, Plaintiff A suffered chrosome images from the inner section, the hyeong section, the right upper part, and both sides of the instant accident, and Plaintiff A suffered eromatic symptoms from both sides. 4) Plaintiff A did not have received safety education separately from the head of the field station prior to the instant construction site.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence, Gap's evidence, Gap's evidence, Eul's evidence, Eul's evidence and video, witness F's testimony and the purport of whole pleadings

B. According to the facts of the above recognition 1, the Defendant, as the user of the Plaintiff, should provide a safe working environment. However, the Defendant placed a dangerous gasoline next to the vehicle’s power generator, did not keep a fire extinguishing machine against fire, and did not provide safety education to the Plaintiff A properly.

The accident of this case is erroneous.