However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Defendant

A is a person who operates franchiseers to load and load containers at the open container storage site for E-stock corporation containers located in D, and Defendant B is a person in charge of overall management of the safety management affairs of the above E-mentioned, and the deputy head of the above company support team.

Defendant

A, around 15:30 on May 8, 2015, around 15:30, in order to load a container loaded on a cargo vehicle by a victim F (V, 52 years old) under the direction of the E Control Office, at the G E terminal 21BLK 21B day zone.

In such a case, as the H Tran cler's weight 135 tons, height 20 meters, and width 18 meters, it is difficult to secure the view of the front, rear, and side, Defendant A was confirmed in advance as to whether the container and the cargo are completely separated when the container was loaded at the time of the operation of the container, and then the lower work should be carried out and the accident should be prevented. Defendant B had a duty of care to assign a signal number that Defendant A instructs to stop the work if the vehicle is not properly separated, and if the vehicle comes to move together, Defendant B had a duty of care to assign a signal number that Defendant A instructs to stop the work.

Nevertheless, the Defendants neglected the above duty of care as a matter of course, and caused the damages to be caused by the victim’s twiter’s cargo loaded on the cargo vehicle using the above H franchiseer, and caused the said twiter’s cargo vehicle to fall from the ground level to about 4 meters above the above container.

As a result, the Defendants jointly suffered from the 12 weeks of the above occupational negligence in the course of the victim’s bruption of the detailed bruption that requires the victim’s treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1.The police of F. F.