[Design of Victory] Yulchon Achieves Three Consecutive Acquittals Under the Serious Accident Punishment Act... "No Unlimited Liability for Exceptional Accidents"

Meticulous Analysis of the Victim’s Movements
Demonstrating the Exceptional Nature of Actions at the Time of Death
Setting Reasonable Boundaries for the Application of the Serious Accident Punishment Act

"The Act on the Punishment of Serious Accidents (Serious Accident Punishment Act) does not impose liability solely based on outcomes. If a management executive has genuinely established and implemented a safety and health management system in accordance with the law, they cannot be held indefinitely liable for unforeseeable and exceptional accidents."

Attorneys Jeong In-tae (from the left), Jeong Yu-cheol, Song Min-kyung, and Kim Hyun-geun from the law firm Yulchon pose for a photo after completing an interview with The Asia Business Daily. Photo by Yoon Dongju

Yoochul Jung, head of the Serious Accident Center at Yulchon LLC, explained this in relation to the recent acquittal verdict he secured for a subcontractor in a serious accident case at a construction company's asphalt concrete paving site. With this verdict, Yulchon LLC has now achieved three consecutive acquittals for its Construction Criminal Team under the Serious Accident Center, earning recognition for setting reasonable boundaries on the application of the Act and for clarifying the importance of a practical safety and health management system in court.

◆Delving Into the Movements for Proof..."No Punishment for Duties Not Stipulated in Law"

An employee of an equipment company (the accident victim), after finishing his assigned work and leaving the site, suddenly re-entered an area where only a tire roller was operating and was fatally caught in the machinery. Prosecutors charged the company, arguing that it failed to take required safety measures—such as drafting and managing a work plan for installing a rear camera and assigning a dedicated guide, as well as enforcing access restrictions.

Yulchon LLC countered by meticulously analyzing the 'unique circumstances' and movement paths at the site. They argued that it was an extremely unusual situation for a worker, who had already completed his work and withdrawn, to re-enter the operational area of the roller. The court accepted Yulchon's argument, stating that "even if there were some deficiencies under occupational safety and health laws or the Serious Accident Punishment Act, it is difficult to conclude that these shortcomings had a substantial causal relationship with the accident." Attorney In-Tae Jung said, "We actively demonstrated through a thorough review of the evidence that it is realistically impossible for a management executive to foresee and prevent such exceptional re-entry by the victim."

While prosecutors cited the lack of a dedicated equipment guide as a violation of the duty to take safety measures, Yulchon LLC invoked the principle of legality, arguing that criminal statutes must be interpreted strictly. Yulchon LLC pointed out that the tire roller work area could not be categorically defined by law as a 'place where there is a risk of contact or collision with vehicle-type construction machinery' that must prohibit worker access, and that there is no regulation requiring a 'guide' to be assigned solely and exclusively to specific equipment.

By accepting these arguments, the court reaffirmed the principle that it is not permissible to impose punishment for obligations not clearly stipulated by law. Attorney Hyungeun Kim explained, "Expanding criminal liability after the fact for safety measures not specified in the law, simply because an accident occurred, runs counter to the principle of legality."

◆What Matters Is the Operation of a Practical System, Not Just Formal Documents

The most significant aspect of this verdict is that it recognized the 'substantive implementation' of the safety and health management system. The court stated, "The mere fact that some parts of the system are somewhat lacking or that certain documents were not properly maintained is not sufficient to easily determine a violation of duty," and delivered a not-guilty verdict.

Attorney Minkyeong Song advised, "Investigative authorities often focus solely on documentary deficiencies when bringing charges, but the court examines whether the system is operating 'reasonably and practically.' Companies should concentrate their management efforts on reasonably foreseeable hazards and risks, rather than on merely generating formal paperwork."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.