beta
Text
1. The Defendant paid KRW 33,580,00 to the Plaintiff KRW 5% per annum from July 14, 2018 to August 10, 2018.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. Comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s written evidence Nos. 1 and 3 as well as the witness C’s testimony and arguments, the Plaintiff, a worker of the Defendant, committed an accident in which the locker, while removing foreign substances in the roller machine as his hand, did so in line with the matr machine at the place of business located in Kimhae-siD on August 29, 2016 (hereinafter “instant accident”). The Plaintiff, a worker of the Defendant, was injured by cutting off the right 5 meters adjacent to the right side of the instant accident, etc.
According to the above facts, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the accident in this case since the accident in this case occurred because the plaintiff's employer, as the plaintiff's employer, has a duty to take necessary measures with a safe physical and human environment so as not to harm life, body, and health in the course of providing labor, such as conducting safety education related to roller machinery and ordering the plaintiff to observe safety rules, etc.
B. Limit of liability, however, the Defendant’s liability is limited to 70% in consideration of the fact that the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff, has failed to properly perform its duty to ensure safety by complying with safety rules by removing foreign substances in the situation of suspension of the operation of roller machine.
2. In principle, a period of time for calculating the scope of liability for damages shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but less than the last month and less than KRW 1 shall be discarded;
The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be based on the reduction rate of 5/12 percent per month to deduct the interim interest.
It shall be rejected that the parties' arguments are not separately explained.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap 2 and 8 evidence, and objection to E Hospital Head of this Court.