Industrial Accident Fatality | Application of the Supplementary Provision on Construction Amounts Under 5 Billion Won, the First Acquittal Under the Serious Accidents Punishment Act

Following an industrial accident fatality, the representative director of Company A, a construction company, was indicted for violation of the Serious Accidents Punishment Act.

The industrial accident in question was an incident in which a cargo truck driver who was performing loading and unloading work in Yeongdeok-gun, Gyeongsangbuk-do, died.

At the time, the driver left the driver's seat while the cargo truck's engine was running, and the vehicle moved and struck the victim.

Unable to avoid the cargo truck, the driver was crushed between a wall and the truck and died.

The prosecution sent the company's representative, B, to trial on the charge that he had failed to establish, under the Serious Accidents Punishment Act, such measures as ▲a procedure for identifying and improving hazardous and dangerous factors, ▲criteria for evaluating the performance of duties by the person responsible for safety and health management, and ▲a procedure for hearing the opinions of workers regarding safety and health.

The court sentenced the site manager, D, who was indicted together, to six months' imprisonment with a suspended sentence (a suspended sentence under Korean law, broadly comparable to a suspended sentence or probation in common-law systems, under which the conviction loses its effect once the suspension period passes without incident) of two years, but it determined that the company's representative, B, was not subject to the Serious Accidents Punishment Act and rendered an acquittal.

The basis for the acquittal was the court's determination that the construction amount of the workplace where the accident occurred was less than 5 billion won.

The prosecution indicted B on the charge of violating the Serious Accidents Punishment Act in September 2023.

The point is that the Serious Accidents Punishment Act began to apply to the construction industry with a construction amount of less than 5 billion won only from January of this year, so B was not subject to the Act at the time of the indictment.

In fact, Company A's construction cost was 4.22 billion won. The prosecution argued that the Serious Accidents Punishment Act applied based on a total construction cost of 5.2 billion won, including 1 billion won in government-supplied materials, but the court did not accept this, taking into comprehensive account the principle of strict interpretation of penal statutes and the legislative intent of the grace provision in the supplementary provisions.

The court stated, “Considering the legislative intent of providing a grace period in order to give small businesses sufficient time to prepare for the enforcement of the Serious Accidents Punishment Act, it is reasonable to regard the construction amount primarily on the basis of the contract amount between the parties.”

It added, “Although there is no provision stating that the cost of government-supplied materials is included when calculating the construction amount, seeking to achieve the regulatory purpose by expanding the scope of punishment through an interpretation that prioritizes the legislative purpose runs counter to the principle of strict interpretation under criminal law and the spirit of the principle of legality.”

It stated that, even where the cost of government-supplied materials is not included in the construction contract amount and is ordered separately, including the cost of government-supplied materials in the construction amount is an interpretation unfavorable to the defendant.

This case is the first acquittal among the 27 first-instance judgments rendered since the enforcement of the Serious Accidents Punishment Act.

Among all the cases, imprisonment with a suspended sentence was the most common at 20 cases, and there were 2 cases of fines.

There were a total of 4 cases in which an actual custodial sentence was imposed, and the highest sentence was two years.

This judgment appears to apply, to the interpretation of the supplementary provision of the Serious Accidents Punishment Act, the Supreme Court's established position that interpreting a penal statute in a manner unfavorable to the defendant beyond the possible meaning of its text runs counter to the spirit of the principle of legality.

To accurately ascertain the scope of legal liability and to establish an effective defense strategy when a serious accident has occurred, it is safest to obtain the assistance of a legal professional.

In particular, because there are not many cases under the Serious Accidents Punishment Act, interpretation through precedent is especially important.

When a serious industrial accident occurs, a rigorous investigation by relevant agencies such as the police and the Ministry of Employment and Labor begins. If an investigation is commenced, it is necessary to promptly demonstrate that the safety and health obligations under related laws such as the Serious Accidents Punishment Act and the Occupational Safety and Health Act have been thoroughly observed.

At Daeryun Law Firm LLP, 🔗attorneys handling industrial accident matters, with experience at the courts, the prosecution service, the Administrative Appeals Commission, the Ministry of Employment and Labor, and major corporations, provide solutions tailored to each client's circumstances based on their accumulated experience and know-how.