업무상과실치사
The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence against the Defendants is published.
1. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant A is a person operating “G medical care center” on the F2th floor in Bupyeongcheon-si, and Defendant B is a person working for the above medical care center as a physician for the care and protection of the above medical care center, and is engaged in the business of providing the aged admitted convenience, such as providing meals.
Defendant
A, while controlling and supervising the medical care center, it is difficult for older persons to move to a mixed with others, and there was a duty of care to have the victim H (98 tax) who lacks the ability to regulate meals, such as eating food and eating food, while eating food without eating food, etc., when providing meals or food to the victim H (98 tax), who is in charge of medical care protection, observe the entire course of meals and prepare for a sudden situation.
Defendant
B was aware of the eating habits of the victim in the course of performing the duty of eating the food, which was directly provided to the victim, and therefore, there was a duty of care to keep the victim's status in keeping the place until the time of eating the food.
Nevertheless, at around 14:43 on September 30, 2016, Defendant A provided meals and food to inmates, including the victim, at a medical care center, at the same time, Defendant A failed to provide adequate education and measures with knowledge that the medical care protection company cannot observe the individual inmates on a regular basis, and that the care protection company cannot properly respond to the situation of care.
Defendant
B In light of the fact that the injured person does not control meals even at ordinary times, and thus, he was aware of drinking habits such as eating drinking in his hand and needs to be observed next to the time of providing meals or liver meals, but he did not take appropriate measures against the injured person for about four minutes until he finds the injured person suffering from respiratory difficulties due to foreign substances, leaving the site, leaving the site, and leaving the site.
As a result, the Defendants jointly do so and thereby are damaged by occupational negligence.