beta
Text
Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.
Defendant
If A does not pay the above fine, it shall be 100.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A Co., Ltd. is a corporation established for the purpose of landscaping planting construction business, etc. with the location of the head office of Jinju-si, which is a business owner who performed the above business from April 9, 2018 to the 18th day of the same month after being awarded a contract from the D Management Office for the construction of trees and batteries of the D apartment complex (hereinafter referred to as the “main construction”). Defendant A is a representative director of the D Management Office of Jinju-si, who is responsible for the safety and health management of his employees.
1. Where the business owner of a defendant A has an employee carry out an operation which is likely to fall off or fall off, he/she shall require the employee to wear a safety cap, and, where he/she carries out an operation by using vehicle meters, loading, unloading, transportation, machinery, etc., he/she shall prepare a work plan which includes safety measures to prevent any danger to workers, such as fall, fallen, electric shock, narrowness, collapse, etc., in accordance with the relevant work in order to prevent any danger to workers, and have them carry out an operation
In addition, when a business owner uses a accusation, he/she should install a safety belt to connect the safety belt with the safety belt.
Nevertheless, at around 14:07 on April 17, 2018, the Defendant did not prepare a work plan that includes safety measures to prevent workers’ danger in the process of having the victim E (the 54-year-old) work at the accusation vehicle, which is the loading and unloading vehicle, and without installing a safety belt that connects safety units to the accusation vehicle, and it is difficult to view that Defendant A did not pay safety caps to the victim on the record by negligence, which caused the victim to perform off-site work at the accusation vehicle, and thus, Defendant A did not have violated the duty to take safety measures or occupational negligence under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.