A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a director at the site of (D) D, a public works company of the “C” in Yeonsu-gu Incheon, who actually managed the safety and health affairs of his/her employees, and E is an article that operated a dump truck at the same construction site.

In order to prevent the danger of workers, a business owner shall conduct a prior investigation into the relevant work, the topography, ground, and ground of the workplace, etc., and record and preserve the results thereof, and shall prepare a work plan in consideration of the results of the investigation and notify the relevant worker thereof so that the work is conducted in accordance with the plan.

1. On July 5, 2013, the Defendant forged E’s signature with a view to arbitrarily stating “E” in the column for signature signature of the work plan on July 5, 2013, stating that, although the Defendant did not inform E of the content of the work plan or receive education confirmation from E, it would have known the fact that safety measures were not taken in the event of an accident in the future at the construction site.

2. On July 6, 2013, the Defendant: (a) conducted an investigation in relation to a safety accident at the site of an office at the construction site (a traffic accident in which E was a worker while driving a dump truck) and exercised the safety work plan stating the forged E’s signature as if it were duly formed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The prosecutor's office and the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each safety work plan;

1. Article 239(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 239(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense (the point of exercise of the above-mentioned signature).