beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 2019.06.04 2019고정46

소음ㆍ진동관리법위반

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

B is the head treatment of the defendant as a person who manages the "D apartment construction" from May 31, 2017 to the general management of the D apartment construction in the Kim Sea-si C.

B, on August 22, 2018, as the standard of living noise control was not observed at the construction site above, and on September 10, 2018, the head of the branch office of Kimhae market issued an order to suspend noise generation from September 12, 2018 to September 19, 2018 to maintain below (noise) control level during the period of prohibition and disposal of the use of machinery and equipment subject to prior reporting on a specific construction project, but violated the order after measuring noise around 09:32, 209 and 73dB on September 19, 2018.

Accordingly, B, a general manager at the apartment site of the defendant, committed a violation of Paragraph 1 in relation to the defendant's business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Protocol concerning the examination of suspect B;

1. A written accusation;

1. Notification of an administrative disposition or a written order for administrative disposition;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the evaluation table of living noise measurement data;

1. Article 59, subparagraph 4 of Article 58, and Article 23 (1) of the Noise and Vibration Control Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. The Defendant’s assertion and determination of the provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, as stated in the instant facts charged, asserts that the Defendant is not guilty in accordance with the proviso to Article 58 of the Noise and Vibration Control Act, even if it is acknowledged that B, a general manager at the apartment site of the Defendant, violated the Defendant’s order to take measures by the head of the branch office Kimhae-si, in order to prevent such violation.

In full view of the data submitted by the Defendant, the Defendant was emphasizing environmental management in the workplace, etc. by enacting environmental management policies and environmental management regulations, etc. and conducted on-site inspections or special education on several occasions to prevent noise control standards from being violated at the time of the occurrence of the instant case, but such circumstance alone is recognized.