The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as follows.

Defendant

A company is not a business owner of the removal of the term "the removal of the term 'the term 'the term 'the removal of the term 'the term 'the removal of the term 'the term 'the removal of the term 'the term '' made in Goyang-gu D' (hereinafter referred to as the "the removal of the case'), and I merely ordered the removal of the case by an individual. Thus, I'

Nevertheless, the lower court acknowledged the instant facts charged on the premise that the Defendant Company was the business owner of the removal of the instant case.

B. Even if family I entered into a contract for the removal of this case in the name of the Defendant Company with H (hereinafter “H”), the Defendant Company did not grant the right of representation to I as to the conclusion of the contract, and thus, it could not be known at all that I would undertake the removal of this case. Therefore, under such circumstances, the Defendant Company cannot be punished under Article 71 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act solely on the ground that I did not prevent “the act of entering into the contract with H as he was delegated by the Defendant Company.”

(2) On the other hand, the part related to the defendant company among the facts charged as stated in the summary order request for the summary order against I, J, K, H, and G (U.S. High Court Decision 2012 High Court Decision 201Da9087) is still included in the indictment against some other defendants. Thus, the part related to the violation of the Industrial Safety and Health Act against the defendant company was re-established.

On January 4, 2012, the Korea District Heating Corporation shall be Suyang-gu, Goyang-gu.