logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 김천지원 2015.01.20 2014고정720
업무상과실치상
Text

The sentence of each sentence against the Defendants shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is an assistant teacher for the first half of the first half of the first half of the D School in the old and American City, and the defendant B is a son for the same half of the same school.

On June 19, 2014, at around 10:50, the Defendants completed 2 teaching hours at the class of 1-1st class of the high school in the fourth floor of the above D School, and moved 7 students, including victims E (year 15) to the craft room for the class of 3rd city craft.

D School is a special school teaching the hearing handicapped and mentally handicapped students, and has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by giving due care to the Defendants working for such special school, such as thorough education on the prevention of accidents, taking into account the mental and physical conditions of students, and by preventing access to a dangerous zone or harmful acts of students, etc.

Nevertheless, Defendant B permitted Defendant A to move 6 students of the same half of the class, with the permission of Defendant B, to move her to the art room, and Defendant A, with the permission of Defendant B, sent 3 students who can move to the art room first, and moved to the toilet in order to find other students of Grade 1 F students of Grade 1 with intellectual disability, which is expected to move her back to the toilet without using a lock locker on the 4th floor of the above D school without being equipped with a locker on the wheel.

Between them, the wheel chairs, which the F was on the side of the wheelchairs on which the victim was aboard, landed to the wheeler of the victim, was pushed down to the lower side of the victim, and the wheeler installed on the wall between the fourth and the third floor of the above D School, conflict with the safety load installed on the wall of the victim.

As a result, the Defendants jointly suffered from the victim’s pulmonary ductal ducts that require approximately eight weeks of treatment, ductal ductal ducts, ductal ductal ducts, and ductal ductal ducts that focus on the absence of any two ductal ducts.

Summary of Evidence

1...

arrow