logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2015.02.06 2014가단200236
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendant

A. Plaintiff A’s KRW 5,730,121 as well as 5% per annum from December 20, 2014 to February 6, 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff B and Plaintiff C are married, and Plaintiff A (E) are married, and Plaintiff B and Plaintiff C’s married.

B. On September 24, 2013, Plaintiff C, except for family affairs, employed the Defendant as a child care provider’s device, such as making the Plaintiff’s ground awareness while careing the Plaintiff, or washing and disinfecting milch bottles, and employed the Defendant as a beer, with the employment of KRW 3:30 to KRW 17:30 per week, and had the Defendant work as a beer, set at KRW 6,000 per week.

C. On October 21, 2013, at around 13:00, the Defendant: (a) 13:00, when Plaintiff B and Plaintiff C were her at the house, she was fluordding Plaintiff A, who was her being mixed with for seven months, she was placed on an abrupt beer bed, and left from the bed; and (b) she was fluored by Plaintiff B and Plaintiff C in the front part of the bed for an abrupted bed; and (c) the Plaintiff’s she was fluoring three degrees of images that require four weeks at the left side of the face due to the mentment in the bed end of the Jinjin-gu. (hereinafter “instant accident”).

[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 3, Evidence No. 5, Evidence No. 5, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. The Defendant has a duty of care to carefully observe the surrounding circumstances, the state and behavior of the infant and prevent safety accidents, as it is anticipated that safety accidents may occur due to dangerous things, such as stand, if he entirely cares for the Plaintiff A, which is a monthly average of seven months.

Nevertheless, as the defendant neglected this and caused the accident of this case, the defendant is responsible for compensating for the damages arising therefrom.

나. 손해배상책임의 범위 (1) 원고 A에 대한 판단 ㈎ 적극적 손해 갑제4호증의 1 내지 9, 가톨릭대학교 서울성모병원장에 대한 감정촉탁회신결과에 의하면, ① 원고 A의 기왕 치료비로 295,220원이 소요된 사실, ② 원고 A는 현재 얼굴 좌측 아래 턱 부위에 1.5cm × 0.5cm의 반흔이 남아 있으며 반흔을 치료하기 위하여 앞으로...

arrow