beta
Text
The judgment below
We reverse the part on the violation of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.
A fine of KRW 500,00 is imposed on a defendant.
Reasons
1. Scope of judgment of party members;
A. The lower court acquitted all of the charges of this case on the charge of occupational injury and death and violation of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.
The prosecutor appealeds all the judgment of the court below on the ground of mistake of facts, and the judgment of the court prior to remand reversed the judgment of the court below and convicted all the charges of this case, and sentenced the defendant to one year.
Therefore, the Defendant appealed to the entire judgment of the lower court before remand, and the Supreme Court did not have any ground of appeal on the violation of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, but reversed and remanded the entire judgment of the lower court before remanding on the ground that, insofar as the part of the death by occupational negligence is reversed in relation to the criminal facts and concurrent crimes under the former part of
B. Therefore, as to the violation of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry among the facts charged in the instant case, it was reversed and remanded to the court of this case on the grounds that there are concurrent crimes with the remaining facts charged against the Defendant, but this part of the charges was rejected by the court of final appeal on the grounds that there were no grounds for appeal by the Defendant, and the part rejected by the court of final appeal on the grounds that it is no grounds for final appeal as to this part of the charges in the instant case,
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do8478, Oct. 13, 2011). Therefore, the following grounds for appeal are examined in sequential order on the premise thereof.
2. Summary of the grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant, while engaging in the work of replacing the HB boiler boiler in which the victim resides, used the existing exhauster without replacing the air exhauster with a longer exhauster even though the height of the new boiler is less than 10 cc, and caused this negligence by this negligence.