The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

B KRW 10 million, and Defendant D Co., Ltd. shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5 million.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to Article 29(1) and (3) of the misunderstanding of legal principles and Article 30(5) of the Enforcement Rule of the Industrial Safety and Health Act, Defendant D Co., Ltd and its representative director, who is a contractor, bear the same duty of care as that of the contractor, but the court below interpreted limitedly that the contractor bears the duty of care to take measures related to ensuring the safety of the place among the rules on occupational safety and health standards. Thus, the court below acquitted the contractor of the facts charged of this case by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to misunderstanding the facts, it can be recognized that the Defendants had no driver’s license on the part of the contractor C, and that there was occupational negligence, which did not take measures such as the preparation of a work plan or the placement of a conductor.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendants (a fine of two million won) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is 1) The business owner of the manufacturing industry who separated a part of the business carried out in the same place as Defendant B (the occupational injury, death, and violation of the Industrial Safety and Health Act) shall take measures necessary to prevent industrial accidents that may arise when his/her employees and those employed by his/her contractor work at the same place, and shall take measures to prevent industrial accidents prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Labor when the contractor engages in work.

On December 24, 2015, the Defendant “I” to the workers C of H, who are contracted in the outdoor workplace of the D Co., Ltd. located in Pyeongtaek-siF around 14:50.