Defendant

A has worked as an inspector of the elevator belonging to the Foundation B from July 1, 2005, and the defendant foundation B is the elevator inspection agency designated by the Minister of Security and Public Administration.

1. On August 26, 2013, Defendant A pointed out that, while conducting a completion inspection on the two units of apartment units installed in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Young-gu, Suwon-si, the Defendant pointed out that he/she will point out and supplement the number of sets, and that he/she passed the completion inspection on September 3, 2013.

After December 13, 2013, as the use of the above elevator was changed from passenger to emergency and disabled, the Defendant made an occasional inspection, and judged the failure on the ground of the operation of the drainage pumps, etc., but on December 16, 2013, the Defendant made a conditional pass decision on December 16, 201, and the final pass decision on April 10, 2014.

When conducting a completion inspection, a regular or occasional inspection of one elevator, it is necessary to verify whether a balanced chain or balanced street is installed to compensate for the influence load arising from a position change between the car at the entrance of the platform and the balanced stiff, and to stop the car to the highest floor and the lower lowest floor respectively, and then confirm whether the balanced stiff is solid to wear the balanced stiff or the balanced stiff, installed at the lower part of the camera and the lower part of the camera and directly stiff, and confirm whether the balanced stiff is clearly fixed so as not to escape the chain or balanced stiff, and whether the balanced stiff is likely to fall on the stiff during operation due to damage to the stiff or rife, etc.

In that sense, the fixed bloet to fix the balanced chain to the lower part of the above elevator balance is limited to ① half 2.5m, a half of which is the thickness of 5.5ms in general high-blobet, ② arbitrarily produced using the speeder who is at the site, was confirmed in the inside, and ③ the Defendant was the same.