beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 60,054,39, Plaintiff B, and C respectively, and each of them from October 29, 2016 to Plaintiff A.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition 1) Plaintiff B is the father of Plaintiff A and Plaintiff C’s mother of Plaintiff A. The Defendant is the restaurant with the trade name “F” from the 1st floor Pcote in Gyeonggi-si, Busan-si, E (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).
(2) On October 29, 2016, the Plaintiffs visited 1st E in Busan Metropolitan City, around 16:55 on October 29, 2016, and Plaintiff B ordered the knife at the knife store. Plaintiff C ordered the knife at the instant restaurant, and the Plaintiff C was waiting for food with Plaintiff A (GGs), his/her knife, his/her knife, his/her knife, his/her knife, his/her knife, his/her knife, his/her knife, his/her knife, and knife his/her knife, his/her knife at the instant restaurant.
At that end, the plaintiff C was off his knife with the knife knife store with the plaintiff B, and was off his knife with the knife knife knife knife.
C) After diving, it is an accident that Plaintiff A’s house-to-face food and beverage-to-face food and beverage-to-face food and beverage-to-face food and beverage-to-face food and beverage-to-face food and beverage-to-house (hereinafter “instant accident”).
) The plaintiff A suffered images on each bridge. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.]
B. 1) The occurrence of liability for damages and limitation of liability is limited to the occurrence of the instant accident, when I gets a strike containing hot food on the table, and the Plaintiff A and H only, which are only one year old at the time of the tableing, left the place and only one year old at the time of the tableing. As such, I should have prevented the Plaintiff A from drinking in a place not contact with the Plaintiff A’s hand, or from drinking until the Plaintiff’s guardian returned to the guardian. Since I was unable to fulfill this duty of care, the Defendant, as an employer, is liable to compensate the Plaintiffs for the damages caused by the instant accident. However, as I am a hot food on the table, the Defendant is liable to compensate for the damages caused by the instant accident.