업무상과실치사
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), the Defendants, the representative director of the contracting company and the chief safety management officer of the contracting company, were given specific directions and supervision as to the victim’s work contracted for the construction of the pipe pipeline, so the Defendants are obligated to take safety measures against the victim, and the Defendants did not take safety measures necessary to prevent accidents, and even if the Defendants were found to have died, the lower court found the Defendants guilty of the facts charged of this case due to mistake of facts
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged is the representative director of the corporation E (hereinafter referred to as the “instant company”) who is a closed drum recycling business in North Korea-si, North Korea-si. Defendant A is the head of the production team and the person in charge of safety management of the said company. Defendant B is the head of the production team and the person in charge of safety management of the said company.
On November 15, 2015, the victim F (59 years of age) was entrusted by the above company with the joint construction of the duct pipeline connected to the factory air pollution prevention facilities. On November 15, 2015, the victim F (59 years of age) was performing the joint construction of the pipeline on the roof of a factory on the surface of about 10 meters from the ground.
On the roof of that place, there was a Sshacker part of plastic material for sunlighting, and the construction work operator has the risk of an accident that the workers fall down under the roof due to the destruction of plastics in the case of a plastic, so the Defendants, who are safety control managers, had the duty of care to prevent accidents due to the fall of the victim, such as paying safety gear to the victim, taking measures not to easily access the part, or taking measures not to damage plastics, etc.
Nevertheless, the Defendants neglected this and did not provide safety equipment, such as safety appearance, to the victims, and cut to the easy straw around the drama, or cut it temporarily.