logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.11.10 2016고단3925
업무상과실치상
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment without prison labor for eight months, Defendant B for six months, and Defendant C for five months, respectively.

(b).

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B is an operator of "L kindergarten" in the Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju, in charge of the operation of M Buses, which is a kindergarten school vehicle, and Defendant A is an teacher of the above kindergarten from July 27, 2016 to July 29, 2016 to take charge of the duties to guide the students of the above kindergarten to participate in the after-school program conducted during the vacation period, while Defendant C is in charge of the duties to identify the list of the students who want to participate in the after-school program as a principal teacher of the above kindergarten and to confirm whether the students who want to participate in the after-school program during the vacation period.

Defendant

At around 08:55 on July 29, 2016, A and Defendant B moved the victim P (three years of age and Chinese nationality) who is the above kindergarten students into the above school bus and became a kindergarten.

In such a case, Defendant A has a duty of care to ensure that the original students are safely boarding and alight from the school bus, and to accurately verify the list and number of the original students on board the vehicle, and to verify whether there is any original student who could not get out of the bus at the time of termination of the operation of the school bus. Defendant B had a duty of care to check whether there is any original student who could not get out of the bus at the time of termination of the operation of the school bus as a driver of the school bus.

On the other hand, Defendant C, as an officer teacher of the above kindergarten, was aware of the fact that the victim was participating in the after-school program using the school bus as above, and was in charge of confirming whether the whole students were present during the vacation period, and therefore, Defendant C had a duty of care to accurately confirm whether he was boarding the school bus or attending the school based on the list of the original students wishing to do so.

Nevertheless, it is not possible.

arrow