logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.03.29 2017노8443
산업안전보건법위반등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the acquitted portion, the instant accident was caused by Defendant A’s negligence, who did not have sufficient safety facilities in the instant lifts.

Since the court below acquitted the defendant on the ground that the defendant was not negligent, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Of the acquitted portion, the Defendants did not attach the instant lifts with a rated load, driving speed, warning sign, etc., and the relevant provisions of the Industrial Safety and Health Act are not premised on the occurrence of damage.

However, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that there was no substantial employment relationship between the victim who died of the accident in the instant case and the defendant company, and that the defendant company was not an employer under the Industrial Safety and Health Act. The court below erred

(c)

The sentence of the lower court (one million won by each fine) against the illegal Defendants in sentencing is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination:

A. In full view of the following circumstances admitted by the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below that found Defendant A’s occupational and practical death, Defendant A breached its duty of care as stated in the facts charged, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below.

It is difficult to see that H’s death was caused by Defendant A’s negligence, and it is proved that the possibility of predicting the occurrence of an accident exists to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see it.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as argued by the prosecutor.

(1) The instant lifts concerns occupational safety and health standards at a height of 80 centimeters wide, 80 centimeters long, and 120 centimeters high.

arrow