If the Defendants did not pay the above fine, 50.

Defendant

A is a director of the D Co., Ltd., and Defendant B is a member of the D Co., Ltd., who operates press machinery at the workplace.

around 19:50 on July 15, 201, Defendants were engaged in the work of stockpiling products from press machinery to victims E (38 years of age) who are employed as a daily worker through the manpower company in the above (D) workplace.

The lower part of the said press machinery had a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by providing the steel plate with a volume of 400 tons in the press and by using the press system in line with the framework when the steel plate was put on the press box, and thus, the Defendants had a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by providing thorough safety education in advance and confirming presses safety consensus, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendants neglected this and did not properly conduct safety education, etc. on the precautions at the time of presses work, and continued work without checking whether the presses safety center operated automatically.

In the process of taking out the product under the press machine by negligence by the Defendants, the victim’s right-hand arms were affixed on the press machine.

As a result, the Defendants jointly caused the victim to suffer the injury cut by the front part of the right arms.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Protocol concerning the suspect interrogation of each of the Defendants

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A disability diagnosis certificate;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Defendants: Articles 268 and 30 of the Criminal Act (the occupation and injury caused by occupational negligence, and the choice of fines) applicable to the crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act requires consideration, such as the degree of injury inflicted by the victim, and the fact that the victim does not want punishment. It is so ordered as per Disposition on the grounds above.