209 Highly Injury caused by occupational negligence

ThisA (60 years old, South)

Freeboard

Attorney Yoon Gyeong-sung

May 28, 2010

The defendant shall be innocent.

Summary of Facts charged

The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the defendant works as a teacher at a middle school, and the victim HuC (the age of 27) is a cause for supporting the science experiment room at a middle school contract. On March 31, 2009, at a middle school located at 0:44, Busan Dong-dong, Busan, the defendant, working as a general manager of the water laboratory of the above students, and at the 3rd floor of the school located at the 2009 Dong-gu, Busan, the defendant, who did not have expertise in the science laboratory powders, arrange the laboratory medicine at the time of arranging the risk and discarded chemical medicine to the victim of the laboratory. Despite his/her duty of care, the defendant neglected to do so, despite of his/her duty of care, such as giving sufficient notice that it should be arranged in the presence of the defendant, and neglected to take care of the risk and pulmonary chemical medicine to the victim (the 13rd to the left side of the victim).

Judgment

In this case, the prosecutor asserts that the defendant breached his duty of care, such as sufficiently notifying the victim who caused the laboratory support of the fact that the defendant should adjust the chemical substance in the presence of the defendant when organizing dangerous and discarded chemical substances, and that the result of the explosion in the laboratory of this case and the injury of the victim hyC was caused.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record are: (i) the victim was employed at a middle school on March 1, 200 and worked as an assistant to the laboratory for a middle school for five years until the explosion accident of this case occurred; (ii) it appears that it would have been sufficiently aware that it would be very dangerous for the victim to handle the chemical substance of the laboratory even if the defendant's notice was not given (a copy of labor contract, inquiry letter 1), and (ii) the victim would not be allowed to arbitrarily handle the chemical substance of the defendant, who was merely an assistant to the laboratory, and the victim would not have been able to arbitrarily dispose of the chemical substance of this case under the instruction of the prosecutor before organizing the chemical substance of this case; and (iii) the victim would not have been able to arbitrarily dispose of the chemical substance of this case by requesting the defendant to dispose of the risks of the chemical substance of this case to the defendant before organizing the chemical substance of this case, and (iii) the victim would not have been able to arbitrarily dispose of the chemical substance of this case without the consent of the defendant, together with other instructions given.

Thus, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judges Song Jinop

1) The teaching materials for the job training of middle school scientific experiment assistants in 2005, in which the victim participated, have already been fully explained.