업무상과실치사
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.
If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.
Punishment of the crime
The defendant is a person who works as a shipmaster of a tugboat D (Incheon Loading, 174t).
On June 5, 2012, around 15:30 on June 15, 2012, the Defendant had connected mooring F with the captain of the said ship in order to tow the barge F as the captain of the said ship at the sea near the Dong-gu Incheon Edup dredging site.
At this time, in order to ensure the safety of seafarers who are engaged in mooring operations as the captain of a tugboat D, the Defendant has a duty of care to check the stern being engaged in mooring operations and to use electricity for close information exchange with seafarers working at the stern, but the Defendant neglected to check the stern and operated the ship without any information exchange with the crew, and caused the victim's negligence, who was on board the barge F at the above time, at the above time, at the above place and place, and was engaged in mooring connections with the barge, and caused the victim's death by driving the fleet to the port side of the barge's port side of the barge F.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. Each police statement made to H, I, and J;
1. The application of a written adjudication (D, F), the reproduction of an accident site (F), an investigation report, or an investigation report (Attachment of autopsy data), or statutes;
1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;
1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion of the provisional payment order against the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that the accident of this case occurred through the sudden publication of the victim who could not be predicted during the tugboat and barge's search and landing. As such, the defendant did not engage in occupational negligence in relation to the accident of this case.
In this case, the accident of this case is concerned.