Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who serves as the head of the election team who exercises overall control over the operation of the entire city transportation company and the operation of the vessels built under the election team, the movement of vessels, mooring of vessels, and the election team equipment.

On November 22, 2016, the Defendant ordered the Victim F (F) F to check the operation and filling conditions of one of the election team equipment at the facility parking lots for 2-3 inner walls located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-gu, the Defendant: (a) the Defendant instructed the Victim F (F) to check the operation and filling conditions of one of the marine floating material removal (Buket grab; hereinafter referred to as “the above machinery”). The above machinery was not used almost after purchase on January 22, 2009; (b) there was no separate maintenance checkup; and (c) there was no replacement of the relevant parts, such as the exhaustter. Therefore, there was a risk of a safety accident due to malfunction and defect.

Therefore, the Defendant had a duty of care to prevent the malfunction of accidents caused by malfunction or defect of the said machinery by immediately suspending the work without any abnormal sign of the said machinery, and by taking measures to request repair and to prevent any other worker from accessing or attempting to operate the said machinery.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and received a report from the injured party on the fact that he did not properly charge the above machinery due to the abnormal state of the distribution inside the machinery at the above time and place, but did not immediately suspend the work or request repair, and did not take all measures such as blocking access to the said machinery or preventing the operation of the said machinery by charging.

On November 23, 2017, the next day: (a) the victim did not have any further instructions from the Defendant; (b) attempted to charge the said machine again; and (c) as a result, the charge was continuously conducted in a state where the amount of damage from the inside of the said machine was reduced, and the hydrogen gas occurred, and was staying inside the exhaust gas room.