1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On June 26, 2016, the Plaintiff joined the Defendant Company, and was working at the Defendant Company’s workplace located in Chungcheongnam-gun budget-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and suffered damage to her m or her m or her m or her m or her m or her m or her m or her m or her m or her m or her m or her m or her m or her power.

The Defendant Company is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the Defendant Company, since it did not perform any safety education or education and instruction for the installation of safety equipment in advance to the Plaintiff.

B. In addition, the defendant company is the possessor of factory machinery and equipment, which is a dangerous structure against the plaintiff, and bears the liability under Article 758 of the Civil Act based on the defect in installation or preservation of the structure, and ultimately bears the liability for joint tort under Article 760 of the Civil Act.

2. Determination

A. First of all, there is no evidence that the Defendant Company is liable to compensate for the instant accident as the Plaintiff’s employer, and there is no evidence that the Plaintiff is an employee of the Defendant Company.

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the written evidence Nos. 1 through 5, it is recognized that the Plaintiff was employed in D Co., Ltd. and served from June 17, 2016 to June 26, 2016.

Therefore, this part of the argument that the plaintiff was employed by the defendant company is without merit.

B. Next, there is no evidence to prove that the instant accident occurred due to the defect in the installation or preservation of a structure, and there is no other evidence to prove that the Defendant Company committed a tort, as to the responsibility under Article 758 of the Civil Act or the claim for responsibility under Article 760 of the Civil Act.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion on this part is without reason to further examine it.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.