logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.05.15 2019고단5891
산업안전보건법위반등
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for six months and by imprisonment for six months, respectively.

However, this decision is delivered to the Defendants.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

C A Co., Ltd. receives a subcontract from F Co., Ltd. to KRW 3,618,844,000 of construction amount, among E-Improvement and malodor reduction works in Osan City D around July 10, 2017, the part of steel and concrete construction works are being constructed up to now, and Defendant B is the person in charge of safety and health management as the head of the site office of C Co., Ltd.

On February 1, 2019, Defendant A instructed Defendant B to build reinforced concrete units at the above construction site on February 16, 2019, and Defendant B instructed Defendant B to dismantle the same brine installed on the underground floor on which concrete building is completed and to install the same brine to be installed on the first floor. Accordingly, Defendant B instructed the victim G to build the same brine on the first floor.

Where a project is executed in the same place and is comprised of specialized construction works in each specialized field, a business owner who is granted a contract for all of the construction works in each specialized field shall take measures to prevent industrial accidents if his/her workers employed by the contractor work in a place with a risk of falling.

However, on the first floor of the work site of this case, there was a risk of fall of workers due to the opening of a tool to identify the banes dismantled in the underground floor, so Defendant A and the safety and health management manager of the company in general charge of safety and health belonging to the company F, which is the contractor, the contractor, and Defendant B, the contractor, had a duty of care to maintain safety risks, fences, covers, etc. in the relevant opening part of the relevant opening part and prevent workers from falling.

Nevertheless, Defendant A and Defendant B neglected this and did not install a safety distress or cover for the prevention of fall on the opening part of the opening part, thereby moving the victim from the first floor through the above opening part.

arrow