logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.05.30 2018노157
업무상과실치사
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal doctrine misunderstanding E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) leased construction machinery from the limited company N (hereinafter “N”) for the instant construction work, including signal numbers and drivers, and E or the Defendant did not have expertise in the operation of the said construction machinery and was in charge of construction machinery-related operations, such as signal number arrangement. Thus, the Defendant did not bear any duty of care in relation to the instant accident. Even if the Defendant’s duty of care is recognized, the Defendant did not have a relation between the Defendant’s breach of duty of care and the instant accident, and the lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant charges. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the following grounds.

A) On March 7, 2017, E, while receiving the instant construction project, agreed to B/L as follows:

(1) A field agent shall assign a technician qualified to manage construction works under Article 40 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry as a field agent, and shall not leave the construction site without obtaining prior consent of the supervisor.

(2) Recipients shall install guidance signboards and all safety facilities at the same time as the commencement thereof so as not to cause any safety accident.

(3) When submitting a detailed work schedule, a beneficiary shall prepare a plan for allocating signal numbers, various guide signboards, safety facilities, etc. to ensure that traffic vehicles and residents do not impede the traffic flow due to the implementation of construction works, and submit them in writing to the head of the ordering agency.

B) In addition, on March 9, 2017, E submitted a document promising to directly perform the instant construction work at Naju, and on March 20, 2017.

arrow