beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 11,193,290, Plaintiff B, and C, respectively, and each of them.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Among the parties, Plaintiff A is the wife of the Victim Network F (hereinafter “the Deceased”) who suffered the following accidents, and Plaintiff B and C are the offspring of the Deceased.
The Deceased engaged in the manufacturing of industrial street non-ferrous metal in the name of “G”, and the Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) provided the Deceased with the place of work as a contract.
Defendant E is a management director and a safety manager of the Defendant Company.
B. On February 11, 2014, the Deceased of the instant accident was performing his duties contracted by the Defendant Company at the Defendant Company’s workplace. Around February 11, 2014, the Deceased was engaged in the work at the Defendant Company’s workplace. At the time of fixing the metal plate (a 4m34cm, 3m40cm, 4.5cm thick), he was in contact with the metal plate, and then he was engaged in the work at a backline by putting the scrap plate back to the Arapt, and then putting the metal plate back in the opposite direction. However, at around 60 to 70§¯, the Deceased was at the end of the instant accident and the iron plate was covered by the metal plate without cutting the steel plate, and the part for which the steel plate was used was covered by the iron plate.
As a result, the deceased died due to cerebral injury, etc.
(hereinafter “instant accident”).
C. On September 5, 2014, Defendant E was notified of a summary order of KRW 3 million (Seoul District Court Masan Branch 2014 high-level 2639) due to occupational negligence or suspicion of death, which caused the death of the deceased by neglecting his duty of care to inform the deceased of the risk of the accident or to conduct safety inspection, and the summary order (the Changwon District Court 2014 high-level 2639) was finalized around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 11 (including branch numbers, if a branch number is included; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2, the result of the court’s verification of CCTV images, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Defendants’ judgment on this safety defense are deceased.