logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.07.21 2016고단878
업무상과실치상
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment for six months, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

Defendant

B The above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A was in charge of the work of converting food materials into mination in the E plant located in Naju City Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Inc., Ltd., in Naju City.

On November 13, 2014, the Defendant, at the above location on November 14:0, 2014, continued to work with the victim F to remove foreign substances attached to the roller at the above location, and had the victim operate the crushinger without properly verifying it even though the victim continued to work, and caused the victim's satis to read it to the mincator.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim due to the above occupational negligence, such as the right side and the pressure of the opening of the entrance, which requires approximately 10 weeks of treatment.

2. Defendant B is the E representative director of the Company E, Inc., Ltd. located in B/L in B/L.

The business owner shall stop the operation of a machine in the course of cleaning the machine, and take necessary protective measures, such as keeping the key in the mechanical operation apparatus and separately managing the key thereof, or installing a signboard, etc., and take necessary measures, such as placing the conductor, where the machine is likely to be operated normally due to inappropriate work methods during the work process.

Nevertheless, at around 14:00 on November 13, 2014, the Defendant did not take any of the above measures when he stopped machinery and removed foreign substances attached to mincls while performing the process of crushing of dried fruits by an employee A and F, an employee of the above E plant, by operating a food crushing machine.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as the business owner, did not take safety measures to prevent the risks caused by the above facilities.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officer in G;

1. Each police statement made to F and H:

1. A copy of each written diagnosis;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

1. Criminal facts;

arrow