Successful Case of Reducing an Excessive Industrial-Accident Damages Claim to Less Than Half

The client was sued for damages arising from an accident in which a worker suffered burns while operating machinery at an apparel manufacturing site.

The plaintiff claimed a substantial amount, combining medical expenses, future medical expenses, lost income due to disability, and consolation money (solatium) for emotional distress.

The plaintiff demanded full compensation on the grounds that the employer had failed to provide adequate safety training and supervision, and the company faced the risk of bearing excessive liability for damages.

There were two core issues in the case.

First, whether the employer had breached its duty of safety consideration; and second, the extent to which the worker's own negligence contributed to the occurrence and aggravation of the damage.

Representing the defendant, Your Legal Team emphasized that although there was room to recognize the safety-management duty in part, the plaintiff was also fully aware of the danger of the machinery yet failed to exercise due care.

Based on the facts that warning labels were affixed to the machinery and that the plaintiff had previously handled similar equipment, the team persuasively argued that the worker's negligence substantially contributed to the cause of the accident.

In addition, at the stage of calculating the amount of damages, the team pointed out that the plaintiff's claimed amount was excessive. It emphasized the need to apply the urban daily-wage standard in calculating lost income,

and highlighted that the temporary disability benefits and disability benefits already received should be deducted. With respect to future medical expenses as well, the team developed a defense argument so that they would be limited to a reasonable scope in light of actual necessity and the timing of payment.

The court did not accept the plaintiff's claim in full, limiting the defendant's liability to 40% and granting only a portion of the claim. As a result, less than half of the amount asserted by the plaintiff was recognized, and the litigation costs were ordered to be borne by each party respectively.

The client was able to conclude the case at a level greatly reduced compared to the initial claim amount, effectively defending against an excessive financial burden.

This case is an example in which, even though the employer's liability was partly recognized in an industrial-accident damages lawsuit, by actively contesting on the grounds of the worker's carelessness and the unreasonableness of the damage assessment, a compensation liability that was effectively reduced by 40% was achieved. Through this, the client significantly reduced the financial risk that could affect its corporate operations and secured an important empirical asset for developing defense arguments in similar cases.