beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for six months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant, from February 2, 2014, is a D on-site director in charge of duties such as storage, repair of machinery, etc. in the Cama-si, Inc., Ltd., the defendant is a person engaged in duties such as personnel management, work instruction, safety management, etc.
At the time, the sn beam beamline loaded in a large sniffer was engaged in the moving of the sniffer into the snife, and in such a case, the defendant engaged in safety management or work instruction shall employ safety personnel, such as signal numbers, etc., to check whether there is a person in the surroundings, and shall connect the sniffer to the snife by keeping the balance of the loaded goods so that the loaded goods connected to the sniffe does not fall short of the balance, and there was a duty of care to take necessary measures to prevent the danger of the loaded goods from the sniffe, such as requiring the workers to wear safety wear the sniffer.
Nevertheless, at around 13:50 on October 30, 2018, the Defendant: (a) at the warehouse of 1 factory of the above C C Co., Ltd. 1; (b) at around 13:50, the Defendant was required to check whether the shot beam installed in the warehouse of the victim E (50 years of age) was a work of moving the shot beam installed in the warehouse using the shot light; and (c) to check whether there was a work operator around the warehouse; and (d) to check whether the shot beam was properly connected to the shot light, without accurately ascertaining whether the shot beam was properly connected to the shot light, the Defendant was in the occupational negligence of operating the shot light of the shot light, and the sloping beam was used in the shot light of the shot light, and the sloping beam was used in the vehicle of the victim and was used in the shot light of the shot light.
Accordingly, the Defendant caused the victim to suffer approximately 32 weeks by occupational negligence as above.