logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.12.23 2015고단3286
업무상과실폭발성물건파열등
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment for one year, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 3,000,000 won, respectively.

except that this judgment.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A is a person in charge of safety management of Company B, a liquefied petroleum gas dealer, and was in charge of the supply and safety inspection of liquefied petroleum gas on the second floor building in Seo-gu, Daejeon.

When a liquefied petroleum gas dealer supplies liquefied petroleum gas to a user, he/she has a duty of care to conduct a safety inspection of his/her facilities and prevent accidents due to gas leakage, etc. in advance.

On December 22, 2014, the Defendant: (a) received an order from the Korea Gas Safety Corporation that completed a completion inspection on the gas pipeline facilities, etc. of the above building from the Korea Gas Safety Corporation to leave the middle valves of gas sirens installed in the above building to remove fire prevention by gas leakage; (b) however, the Defendant did not conduct a safety inspection on gas pipelines installed in the first floor of the building, and then put them into the part, thereby causing damage to the victim’s body or property by causing damage to the victim’s life, body, or property by causing damage to the victim’s life, body, or property by causing damage to the victim’s life, body, or property by causing damage to the victim, without taking a safety inspection on the gas pipelines installed in the first floor of the above building, and without taking an interim valve treatment, such as cutting off, etc., on the ground of the negligence around 16:34, 2015.

2. Defendant B, a corporation established for the purpose of liquefied petroleum gas sales business, etc., and the above Defendant A, an employee of the Defendant at the date, time, place under the preceding paragraph, violated the duty of safety inspection at the time of supplying liquefied petroleum gas.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. G, .

arrow