안전사고에 대한 사업주책임과 개인책임 - 산업안전보건법위반죄와 업무상과실치사상죄의 관계 -

Two different rules of law intersect with respect to criminal liabilities for industrial accidents. One is the crime of death and injury by occupational negligence personally applicable to the worker, and the other is the breach of the Occupational Safety and Health Act applicable to the business owner. The liability for the former crime arises from the duty of the State to protect and guarantee the fundamental rights of individuals for personal liberty and freedom (Articles 10, 12 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea). Any person who has violated the life and personal liberty of another person is punishable under the Criminal Code even if such an act arises from occupational negligence. The liability for the latter crime was promulgated to guarantee the workers’ “rights pertaining to the working environment” (Article 32, Paragraphs 1 and 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea). The State imposes upon the business owners the obligation under the public law to take safety and health measures, which are, upon violation by the business owner, subject to criminal punishment. The State even provided for the liabilities of the client and contract business owner by presupposing the case where there may be plural business owners in one workplace due to in-house subcontracting. The ‘liability of an individual’ and the ‘liability of the business owner’, and the ‘liability of the client’ and the ‘liability of the contractor’ intersect as such with respect to industrial accidents. The court for the precedent in question ruled that the business owner under Article 24, Paragraph 1 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act is limited to business owners who directly control and manage the workplace, i.e., business owners who are able or obligated to determine the working environment and the terms and conditions of labor. It is significant in that it proposed the criteria for judging the scope of the ‘business owners’ liabilities’ to be borne by the client and the contractor in an in-house subcontracting case. However, the precedent in question acknowledged the contractor’s manager’s criminal liabilities while denying the criminal liabilities of the contract business owner. Even though the contract business owner may not be held criminally liable for any industrial accidents occurring in the client’s workplace, the contractor’s manager is obligated to take safety and health measures for employees he/she commands and supervises in accordance with the labor contract or the rules of employment. The contractor’s manager is ‘personally liable’ for any industrial accidents which arise from occupational negligence within the contractor’s workplace.