2015 Godan938 A. Occupational outflow and gas outflow

(b) Injury by occupational negligence;

(c) Violation of the Toxic Chemicals Control Act;

1. A. B.

2. A. B. B

3.(b) C. C. C. C. M.

4 . 나 . 丁

5. (c) A Stock Company;

a Representative Director

b Representative

Yang Jae-heat (Lawsuits) and Kim Jong-chul (Trial)

Law Firm Mad Co., Ltd. (private ships for all of the defendants)

[Defendant-Appellee]

June 17, 2015

[Defendant A]

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,00,00.

Defendant who has converted 100,000 won into one day when the above fine has not been paid;

shall be confined in a workhouse.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

[Defendant]

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,00,00.

Defendant who has converted 100,000 won into one day when the above fine has not been paid;

shall be confined in a workhouse.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

[Defendant C.C.]

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,00,00.

Defendant who has converted 100,000 won into one day when the above fine has not been paid;

shall be confined in a workhouse.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

[Defendant]

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,00,00.

Defendant who has converted 100,000 won into one day when the above fine has not been paid;

shall be confined in a workhouse.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

[Defendant A]

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 3,00,000 won.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

Criminal facts

피고인 A 주식회사 ( 대표이사 a ) 는 용인시 처인구 * * 에 본점을 두고 , 충남 금산군 * * 에 중부사업장을 둔 화학제품 제조업 등을 영위하는 법인이고 , 피고인 丁은 위 중부사업 장의 공장장으로서 생산 및 안전보건 총괄 책임자이고 , 피고인 丙은 위 중부사업장의 생산2팀 부장으로서 소속 직원들의 관리 감독 책임자이고 , 피고인 乙은 같은 팀의 주 임이고 , 피고인 甲은 같은 팀의 사원이다 .

1. Joint criminal conduct by Defendant B and Defendant A (the outflow of gas by occupational negligence)

On August 24, 2014, at around 09: 09, the Defendants entered the leakage inspection (e.g., leak ck ck ck ck ck cl. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c.) in the presence of the water managers belonging to the team c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c.

Nevertheless, the Defendants neglected to do so, and Defendant A was unable to confirm the opening and closing of the broadband, even if the broadband was opened to cut off air pressure by Defendant A, and the Defendants were forced to do so without confirming the opening and closing thereof.

T valves are opened, and Defendant B kept the work string, and maintained it by negligence on the work string, and the amount of at least 2.97 km, maximum of 11.02 km by negligence on the part of the business operation, exposed to toxic steam during the air, and spread to the outside of the loading and unloading site.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly leaked gas due to occupational negligence.

2 . 피고인 甲 , 피고인 乙 , 피고인 丁 , 피고인 丙의 공동범행 ( 업무상과실치상 )

피고인들은 같은 일시 , 장소에서 , 무수불산 원액을 탑재한 탱크로리를 하역장으로 옮 겨온 뒤 제조라인으로 무수불산을 인입하기 위한 일련의 작업을 수행함에 있어 , 위 무 수불산 원액은 강한 부식성 , 자극성이 있는 산성의 발연성 액체로서 유리를 녹이며 , 사 람이 그 증기를 흡입하였을 경우 호흡곤란 , 피부질환 등을 일으킬 수 있는 위험성이 매우 높은 유독물이라는 사실을 잘 알고 있었으므로 , 피고인 甲 , 피고인 乙은 작업 지 침에서 정해진 순서 및 방법에 따라 안전하게 리크체크 작업을 수행하여 무수불산이 누출되는 사고를 방지하여야 할 업무상 주의의무가 있었고 , 피고인 丙은 소속 근로자 들에 대한 업무관리 및 감독 책임자로서 위와 같은 소속 근로자들의 유독물 취급 업무 에 관한 일정을 미리 파악하고 유독물관리자를 배치해준 뒤 작업 지침에 정해진 순서 및 방법에 따라 안전하게 리크체크 등의 작업을 수행할 수 있도록 감독함으로써 무수 불산이 누출되는 사고를 방지하여야 할 업무상 주의의무가 있었으며 , 피고인 丁은 위 사업장의 안전보건에 관한 총괄책임자로서 소속 근로자들로 하여금 작업 지침에서 정 해진 순서 및 방법에 따라 안전하게 작업하도록 철저히 교육시켜 무수불산이 누출되는 사고를 미연에 방지하여야 하고 , 만약 누출사고가 발생할 경우 그에 대한 즉각적인 방 제조치와 함께 소속 근로자나 인근 주민에게 신속히 누출사실을 알려 피해 확대를 막 아야 할 업무상 주의의무가 있었다 .

그럼에도 불구하고 피고인 乙 , 피고인 甲은 전항과 같이 유독물관리자의 참여가 없 는 가운데 미리 밴트밸브를 잠그지 않고 케미컬 게이트 밸브를 열어 무수불산을 증기 로 유출되게 하고 , 피고인 丙 , 피고인 丁은 위 근로자들이 작업지침에 정해진 순서와 방법을 지키지 아니한 채 작업을 진행하여 위와 같이 무수불산을 증기로 유출되게 하 고 그 직후 이를 사실대로 관계 당국 및 인근 주민들에게 전파하지 아니하였음에도 , 이에 대한 업무상의 지시 · 감독을 소홀히 하였다 .

As a result, Defendant B suffered bodily injury, such as the number of days of treatment, corrosion, etc. in the area around the fenced at a point of 50 meters adjacent to the loading and unloading site, which is the gas leakage point, by suffering from the inner 2 degrees of heart 2, which requires approximately four weeks of treatment. The victim H (the age 49), and victim I (the age 47) exposed to non-waterless gas, thereby causing injury to each of them, such as an influence of treatment days and corrosion around the snow.

As a result, Defendants jointly and negligently suffered injury to others due to the above occupational negligence; 3. Defendant C’s crime (Violation of the Toxic Chemicals Control Act)

When the Defendant manufactures, imports, sells, keeps, stores, transports, or uses poisonous substances, or when he loads or lands poisonous substances into or out of other poisonous substance-handling facilities, he shall take measures to participate in the poisonous substance-handling facilities and take measures to comply with the standards for the control of poisonous substances. However, at around 00:0, the Defendant, at the same place between 09:11 and 00, has a staff member of the production2 team * * * * the replacement of the tank with non-water reservoir and the installation of valves, and then have B and A take charge of the dracking of non-water reservoir as above.

Accordingly, it violated the management standards of Defendant's poisonous substance.

4. The crime of Defendant A stock company (Violation of the Toxic Chemicals Control Act);

The Defendant, at the same time and place as the above Paragraph 3, committed the same violation as the above Paragraph 3, while C, who is an employee, was in office of the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Yellow **, Park *, Gam *, Gam **, I, this*, Article *, Article * Each police protocol of police against *

1. A written appraisal;

1. Calculation results of the amount leaked to hydrogen (unclaimed acid)

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. Each photograph;

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts;

Defendant A: Articles 173-2(2) and (1), 172-2(1), 30 of the Criminal Act (a point of gas outflow by occupational negligence), Articles 268 and 30 of the Criminal Act (a point of causing by occupational negligence)

Defendant B: Articles 173-2(2) and (1), 172-2(1), 30 (a) of the Criminal Act, Articles 268 and 30 of the Criminal Act (a person injured by occupational negligence)

C. C. : Articles 268 and 30 of each Criminal Code (the point of injury caused by occupational negligence), Article 60 Subparag. 4, and Article 24 Subparag. 4 of the Toxic Chemicals Control Act

피고인 丁 : 각 형법 제268조 , 제30조

Defendant A: Article 62, Article 60 subparag. 4, and Article 24 subparag. 4 of the Toxic Chemicals Control Act

1. Competition;

피고인 甲 , 乙 , 丙 , 丁의 각 업무상과실치상죄 상호간 : 각 형법 제40조 , 제50조

1. Selection of penalty;

Selection of each fine

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendant A, B, C: each of the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Provided, That C, with respect to Defendant C, to the extent that the maximum amount of each of the crimes is aggregated)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

피고인 甲 , 乙 , 丙 , 丁 : 각 형법 제70조 제1항 , 제69조 제2항

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendants: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that all of the sentencing conditions, including the background and risk of the instant crime, the circumstances after the outflow of the unclaimed outflow, whether the victims are reimbursed of damage, the confession of the Defendants, the degree of reflection, the records of the Defendants’ crimes, etc., shall be punished as a fine.

Judges Lee Jong-soo