Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 1,000,000 and by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Defendant

A above.

Criminal facts

1. The defendant A is the representative of the stock company B located in C in C in terms of harmony and is responsible for safety and health of his employees.

The business owner shall have workers who drive a vehicle in the manner of sitting and operating the vehicle wear safety seat belts. <2> The business owner shall install a closed structure that enables workers to wear safety seat belts so that they may not be exposed to the charging part of the charging part of the electric machinery, apparatus, or street, etc. which is in danger of electric shock by having contacted or approaching the charging part of the electric equipment, apparatus, or street due to work, passage, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not install safety seat belts on August 28, 2012, and was exposed to the entire charge department of the wall without installing safety seat belts on the wall.

2. Defendant B Co., Ltd. is a corporation established for the purpose of manufacturing infant supplies.

Defendant

A, the representative of the company, at the date and place specified in paragraph (1), did not take safety measures as referred to in paragraph (1) with respect to its duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. An integrated supervision and inspection table on safety and health, including manufacturing business;

1. Application of statutes to a written corrective order;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Subparagraph 1 of Article 67, and Article 23 (1) 1 and 3 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act;

(b) Defendant B: Articles 71, 67 subparag. 1, and 23(1)1 and 3 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act;

1. The former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for detention in a workhouse (Defendant A);

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (the defendant) does not focus on the degree of violation of the duty to take the safety measures of this case for the reason of sentencing of Article 334(1) of each of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defendant A has no power to commit the same crime, there is no power to punish other than the one-time fine, and the defendant A has faithfully performed the improvement measures