산업안전보건법위반
The Defendants are not guilty.
1. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant A corporation established for the purpose of construction in South and North Korea on May 27, 1992, and Defendant B, as the representative director of A corporation, is a person in charge of safety and health management who exercises overall control over and manages affairs concerning safety and health of employees belonging to the corporation at the site of “the removal of the designated waste disposal facilities of the E Teachers” located in Gangnam-gun, which was performed by A corporation.
(a) A person who removes or dismantles a structure or facility containing asbestos in Defendant B shall put the residual materials containing asbestos generated in the process of dismantling or removing asbestos, etc. in plastic bags or other materials similar thereto and then dispose of them in accordance with the Waste Management Act by attaching a mark at the time of the disposal of residual materials containing asbestos;
Nevertheless, the defendant from July 21, 2017 to the same year.
7. Until December 24, 200, it did not comply with the work standards for dismantling or removing asbestos by ensuring that residuess containing asbestos remain in the above site of “E-designated waste removal construction work”, and asbestos dismantling work, and on the floor of 4-1 Ban class, 5-1 Ban class, corridor-1 Ban class, 1-1 Ban class.
B. Defendant A Co., Ltd. committed a violation as described in paragraph (1) in relation to the Defendant’s business at the time and place specified in paragraph (1).
2. The part that can be recognized by the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor was found in the part of the construction site of this case after the Defendants completed the instant construction work.
However, in light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, Defendant B committed a violation as described in the summary of the above facts charged.
There is insufficient evidence to acknowledge it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the facts charged against Defendant A, which is premised on Defendant B’s violation, cannot be recognized.
(1) Defendant.