beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 30,171,936 with the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from March 5, 2018 to October 16, 2019.
Reasons
Basic Facts
Defendant E is running a restaurant with the trade name “G” in Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F (hereinafter referred to as “instant restaurant”), and registered its business in its name with the consent of Defendant D, the husband of the instant restaurant.
At around 18:00 on March 5, 2018, Defendant E: (a) had an implied kitchen containing hot water in the restaurant of this case; (b) thus, Defendant E did not take such measures as her duty to pay attention to customers or to temporarily fix the implied kitchen, and the Plaintiff did not take such measures; (c) the Plaintiff was able to see that the Plaintiff was in his hands and her possession of hot State water, which goes beyond the implied kitchen (hereinafter “the instant accident”), and thereby, she sustained 2 Do and 3 Do video products from the Plaintiff for about 8 weeks of medical treatment.
‘The crime of injury caused by occupational negligence' was sentenced to 2 years of suspended execution on July 25, 2018 by imprisonment without prison labor for 6 months (Seoul Northern District Court 2018 Godan2032). This was confirmed to be the subject of the appeal period around that time.
[Based on the facts that there was no dispute, Gap evidence No. 15, Gap evidence No. 4-1 to No. 4, and the purport of the entire argument as to the above recognition of the liability for damages arising out of the above recognition, defendant Eul operated the restaurant of this case as a person operating the restaurant of this case, and as such, the defendant Eul did not take such measures as he did not take a duty of care to prevent the transfer of hot state products contained in the restaurant of this case to customers by fixing it so as not to go beyond the above implied cooking period, and caused the accident of this case. Thus, the defendant Eul is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages incurred to the plaintiff due to the accident of this case.
Where it is permitted to use another person’s own name in connection with any business, and where the business is in the internal relationship of the other person’s business and is not the nominal owner, the business is the nominal owner.