업무상과실치사등
Defendant
All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.
1. The scope of trial in this Court is limited to Co-Defendant C, a Co-Defendant C, a non-Appellant, and the prosecutor also did not appeal to the same defendant, and its judgment became final and conclusive. As such, the scope of trial in this Court is limited to the remaining part of the judgment of the court below
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
B. The Prosecutor’s sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, suspended execution for 2 years, and fine for 12 million won for Defendant B) is too uneased and unreasonable.
3. Determination
A. Defendant A is recognized as the substantial operator of the Co., Ltd., the place where the instant accident occurred, who was obligated to take necessary safety measures in order to ensure the safety of workers and to prevent risks that may occur to workers within the workplace, but the negligence, which neglected to take such measures, caused the victim’s death to gross damage.
However, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant has no record of punishment or punishment exceeding a fine for the same crime; (b) the Defendant repents and reflects his criminal act from the investigation stage to the trial at the trial; (c) the bereaved family members of the victim expressed their intention not to punish the Defendant in the investigation stage; (d) the Defendant has completed corrective measures against the violation of the duty to take safety measures; and (e) has been making efforts to prevent accidents continuously; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character, conduct, environment and other sentencing conditions are deemed to be too heavy or unreasonable.
B. The Defendant’s negligence of neglecting the duty to take safety measures on the job site caused a serious damage to the victim’s death, and the Defendant’s February 2017.