Subcontracted Worker Dies in 'Songjeontap Construction'... Supreme Court Rules Main Contractor KEPCO Also Guilty

by Kim Daehyun

Published 20 Apr.2022 10:05(KST)

Supreme Court, Seocho-gu, Seoul.

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) has been found guilty as a contractor, along with the subcontractor responsible for the work, in connection with the death of a worker who was electrocuted while working on a transmission tower construction.

On the 20th, the Supreme Court's 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Cheon Daeyeop) confirmed the original sentence, sentencing KEPCO regional headquarters chief Mr. A to 10 months in prison with a 2-year probation for involuntary manslaughter and violation of the Industrial Safety and Health Act, and imposing a fine of 7 million KRW on KEPCO.

Previously, in June 2017, KEPCO commissioned the relocation of a transmission tower and entrusted the project to electrical equipment company B. However, in November of the same year, a worker employed by company B died from electrocution at the site. The prosecution brought charges against Mr. A, the KEPCO regional headquarters chief, KEPCO, and an executive of company B who was responsible for safety and health at the site.

The first trial stated, "The primary responsibility lies with the original contractor, KEPCO, for failing to conduct comprehensive safety management," and added, "In particular, no separate safety and health general manager was appointed for the construction, and the defendant, as the person in charge of the work, effectively neglected the duty of safety management." "The degree of violation of safety obligations by the defendants is not minor, and since the victim's death was a serious consequence, appropriate punishment is necessary."

Accordingly, Mr. A and the site safety manager from company B were each sentenced to 10 months in prison with a 2-year probation. KEPCO and company B were fined 7 million KRW each.

The appellate court dismissed their appeals. The appellate court pointed out, "Considering the burden of work as the business owner, the fact that no person capable of practically managing safety for the project was designated as the safety and health manager, nor was any staff assigned to directly manage safety at the site, only indicates that the defendants neglected safety management at the workplace and does not constitute grounds for exempting the defendants from liability."

The Supreme Court also upheld this judgment. The Supreme Court stated, "The lower court did not err in its legal interpretation regarding the duty of care in the course of work, the duty of safety management, and the duty of safety measures," and rejected all appeals by KEPCO and others.