[ad_1]
Sentencing criteria will be strengthened so that if an employer violates the obligation to take health and safety measures and a fatal accident occurs, they can be punished with a maximum of 10 years and 6 months in prison. When similar accidents are repeated or there are multiple victims, the punishment is exacerbated.
On the 12th, the Supreme Court sentencing committee announced that it had decided to amend the sentencing criteria for wrongful death and occupational safety and health crimes that contain these details.
Under the amendment, the basic range of punishment for an employer when a worker dies due to a violation of safety and health measures was previously 6 months to 1 year and 6 months in prison, but the amendment has been adjusted to 1 year to 2 years and 6 months in prison.
If you are a majority offender or commit a second offense within 5 years, you can be sentenced to up to 10 years and 6 months in prison. The punishment has been greatly strengthened by adding a repetitive accident case similar to the multi-victim case as a ‘weighted special person’ who can increase the sentence. In addition, the guidelines were applied to the violation of the obligation to take safety and health measures not only for the employer but also for the contractor, and the case of the death of a field apprentice was included.
On the 5th of next month, Yang Hyungcom will hold a public hearing on the amendment via non-face-to-face video conference, and then finalize the resolution in the plenary session on March 29. The Supreme Court has a policy that will apply to royal trials starting in April.
In response to this, the industry strongly objected. A representative of an SME criticized: “It is not a balanced or comprehensive approach to think that strengthening punishment is the only answer without mentioning at all that Germany, Japan and Northern Europe, etc., are achieving excellent security without adopting punishment. strict”. . CEO Lee added: “Relying on strong penalties is expected to have further dysfunction, such as not having a net function that contributes to the reduction of industrial accidents, and excessive punishment is concentrated on socially vulnerable people such as small and small businesses. In particular, the level of sanctions for the Occupational Safety and Health Law, which applied the reinforced sentencing standards, is not much different from the law on punishment for severe disasters recently passed by the National Assembly. For this reason, criticism continues that the Severe Disaster Act legislation is a “demonstration ceremony”.
[한우람 기자 / 정희영 기자]Now even the court is convicted of corporations … “The Chinese CEO has no choice but to close the door in jail.”
5 days after the approval of the National Assembly of the Severe Disaster Law
Reinforcement of the guidelines for sentencing in the Industrial Safety Law
Precise regulation of work environment and behavior
Reduced business activities due to excessive punishment
In addition to “good faith business without damage
To create a reasonable sentence “
‘Update of the industrial accident criteria’
Jae-gap Lee, requested from the Commission last year
Following the approval of the Law on Commercial Sanctions for Severe Accidents by the National Assembly, on the 12th, the judgment committee of the Supreme Court recommended a significant increase in the guidelines for the judgment of the Occupational Safety and Health Law. Late last year, at a construction site in Jung-gu, Seoul, a worker works precariously outside a high-rise building. [이충우 기자]# Company A located in Ansan, Gyeonggi province. An accident occurred last year in which a worker was trapped while removing scrap stuck between the workpiece and the mold in the press automation process. Fortunately, the worker was not seriously injured, but it could cause a serious accident, so the CEO of Company A was surprised. A company official said: “Always educate and emphasize workplace safety rules, but due to the nature of the press process, accidents often happen due to minor oversight. We don’t want a safe workplace.” It is unfortunate that the revision of the health law seems to emphasize only harsh punishment rather than prevention of accidents in the workplace.
The sentencing committee of the Supreme Court has established guidelines for the crimes of involuntary manslaughter and occupational safety and health, so that in the event of a fatal accident, the employer can be sentenced to a maximum of 10 years of prison. This is the maximum of the legal provisions specified in the Occupational Health and Safety Act to which this judgment criterion applies. This is a strict punishment that overlaps with the Law of Commercial Penalties for Severe Accidents approved by the plenary session of the National Assembly on the 8th. In the business world, sighing voices come out, “If this were the case, what why did you make the serious disaster law? ” In particular, there is the paradox that there will be a breach in the management of safety at the site if the owner or CEO is punished by the Major Accident Act and the safety and health management officer is also sanctioned by the Sanan Law. On the 12th, the Korean Chamber of Commerce and Industry announced its official position: “The court should establish a reasonable sentencing standard so that well-meaning companies working to prevent industrial accidents are not unduly punished.” In-Sik Jeon, head of the labor and employment policy team at Korea’s Sang-Ang Sang, emphasized that “prevention is more important than strengthening punishment to drastically reduce safety accidents at industrial sites.”
Economic organizations are only revealing their official position at the principle level, but they are paying a thousand dollars inside. A business official said: “It was an expected procedure that the sentencing criteria of the sanan law would be set at the highest level, and it was established within the legal framework, so there is no particular explanation.” “I have a question about what it was legislated for.”
▶ Click here to enlarge the view
The tightening of the Supreme Court’s sentencing criteria is expected to deal a severe blow to corporate business owners, along with the Severe Disaster Act legislation. The punishment for the Sanan Law is the employer and the person in charge of security management, etc. In the case of an individual entrepreneur, it is ’employer = individual’, while in the case of a corporate company, it is ’employer = corporation’. For this reason, the prison sentence for employers applies only to sole proprietorships. For individual business owners, the validity of legal punishment is inevitably the same, be it the Sanan Law or the Serious Accident Law.
However, corporate business is different. Under the Sanan Law, the subject of prison for corporate entrepreneurs is the person in charge of the field. The Sanan Law punishes the person in charge of the company for a fatal accident, while the Serious Disaster Law also punishes managers such as owners and CEOs. In the event of death from a workplace accident, the “president, president, and manager” must be prepared for punishment. It is a structure in which the degree of vacancy in the field inevitably increases.
SMEs are more embarrassing. This is because the ability to deal with accidents is lower than that of large companies, and most owners and CEOs are.
“In the case of small and medium-sized enterprises, the representative and the responsible person should handle the accidents and resume business,” said the CEO of Company B at the Namdong Industrial Complex in Incheon.
In midsize industry, criticism is emerging that strict government and National Assembly punishment on the safety of industrial sites will seriously reduce business activities. It is an excessive punishment that ignores reality.
According to the medium-sized industry, there are a total of 1222 mandatory provisions for occupational safety under the current industrial safety law. “Unlike general laws, the Sanan Law has separate rules on health and safety standards in addition to compliance ordinances and compliance regulations, and these rules are made up of 673 articles.” That’s why ”, he explained. “The content, work environment, work behavior and hazardous materials are very detailed, but there are many complaints that it is difficult to maintain due to the wide range of obligations.” As the law was passed earlier this year, related investigations have increased. ”
On the other hand, the discussions in the Yang Hyeong Committee were due to the fact that the Minister of Employment and Labor, Lee Jae-gap, met with President Kim Young-ran in June last year and requested an increase in the guidelines. for the punishment for work accidents. Minister Lee explained: “In the event of an accident that could have been sufficiently avoided, it will be necessary to receive a strict punishment to raise awareness of safety issues.” The Yang Hyeong-Com accepts this and has been gathering opinions on the Sanan Law ruling since last July.
[한우람 기자 / 안병준 기자][ⓒ 매일경제 & mk.co.kr, 무단전재 및 재배포 금지]
