The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The Defendants violated the provisions of the Industrial Safety and Health Act, as stated in the facts charged, such as the use of additional ices, preliminary inspection of the pumps of this case and the failure to take risk measures, preparation of work plans, restrictions on workers' access, and failure to place guides.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case 1) Defendant A was engaged in the safety management of workers employed by B, Co., Ltd., as the head of the site office of the structural construction of the structural frame subcontracted by B among the two sections of H apartment construction works in Goyang-gu, Goyang-gu, Goyang-si, Goyang-si. The Defendant, around 14:00 on December 12, 201, intended to have concrete pumps work on the third floor of the above site 306 - 306 - from the above site. A) The Defendant, when using a concrete pumps, who is a vehicle-based construction machinery, should observe the safety level in the use of the equipment handling manual, such as the prohibition of using booms, in order to prevent the destruction of the equipment from using booming, etc., in accordance with the equipment handling manual for the pertinent machinery, but at the time, added boom boom (a. 7m in length and concrete filling 250k -g in weight).

B) When the Defendant drives a machine, he shall conduct a prior inspection of major structural parts, such as a major response source (or anticipated part), and the discovery of abnormal structures such as cracks, immediately, such as reinforcement or replacement, but he did not conduct a prior inspection and prevention of danger to the connecting part of a boom group. However, despite the fact that the employer has notified the relevant worker of the details of the work plan prepared and prepared in order to prevent the danger of workers, the Defendant falls under the scope of the work plan prepared by the Defendant.