New sentencing guidelines have been proposed that recommend up to 15 years in prison for employers or managers who severely violate safety and health obligations, resulting in worker fatalities. This change addresses ongoing concerns about lenient penalties since the implementation of the Serious Accident Punishment Act, raising the lower limit of basic sentencing recommendations above the previous average.
The Supreme Court's Sentencing Commission announced on September 22 that it reviewed amendments to sentencing guidelines for negligent homicide, industrial safety and health crimes, and serious accident crimes during its 148th plenary session the previous day.
These guidelines serve as recommendations for judges when determining sentences. While they are not legally binding, judges must provide reasons for any rulings that deviate from these guidelines.
The commission set the recommended sentencing for negligent homicide in serious industrial accidents at a range of 10 months to 2 years for the mitigation area, 1 year and 6 months to 4 years for the basic area, and 3 to 10 years for the aggravation area.
The lower limit of the basic area, set at 1 year and 6 months, is higher than the statutory minimum of 1 year and the previous average sentence of about 1 year and 2 months. The statutory penalty for negligent homicide in serious industrial accidents is at least 1 year in prison or a fine of up to 1 billion won, but there had been no specific sentencing guidelines established until now.
If there are two or more special aggravating factors, or if the number of special aggravating factors exceeds the number of special mitigating factors by two or more, the upper limit of the aggravation area can be increased by up to half. This allows for a maximum recommendation of 15 years in prison.
Severe violations of safety and health obligations will be considered as special aggravating factors. Examples include ignoring reports of danger from workers or safety managers, or instructing workers to continue operations despite unresolved risks.
Also included are cases where employers only take formal actions in response to repeated administrative correction orders or leave untrained workers exposed to hazardous areas. Sentences can also be increased for cutting safety budgets, diverting funds for other purposes, failing to include minimum safety costs in subcontracting agreements, or setting unreasonably short construction periods that hinder safety measures.
If an individual is convicted of a serious industrial accident crime and commits the same crime again within five years, the recommended upper and lower limits of the sentence will be increased by 1.5 times.
Conversely, if the victim's family does not wish to pursue punishment or if substantial recovery of damages has been achieved, this will be considered a special mitigating factor. However, it will be carefully assessed whether the family expressed this desire freely without coercion from the employer. If undue pressure is exerted on the family during the settlement process, it will be treated as an aggravating factor.
Effective measures to prevent recurrence will be reflected as general mitigating factors and key positive reasons for probation decisions. Employers must go beyond merely correcting violations or promising to prevent future incidents; they must investigate the causes of accidents, eliminate risks, and improve overall safety management systems at their workplaces.
For serious industrial accident injuries resulting in significant harm or occupational diseases, the recommended sentencing ranges are 6 months to 1 year and 6 months for the mitigation area, 1 year to 2 years and 6 months for the basic area, and 2 to 5 years for the aggravation area. These guidelines are limited to prison sentences, with no provisions for fines included.
The commission has also prepared sentencing guidelines for obstructing DUI tests, including the act of consuming alcohol after a DUI incident or using substances that affect blood alcohol concentration to interfere with testing.
The guidelines for obstructing DUI tests mirror those for refusing to take a breathalyzer, recommending 6 months to 1 year and 2 months for the mitigation area, fines of 3 million to 10 million won, 8 months to 2 years for the basic area, fines of 7 million to 15 million won, and 1 year and 6 months to 4 years for the aggravation area.
Individuals with a history of drunk driving, refusal to take tests, or obstruction who commit offenses again within 10 years, and those with three or more convictions for similar offenses in the past five years, will only be recommended for prison sentences, not fines, across all areas. This does not guarantee a prison sentence, as the decision on probation will be made based on separate criteria.
The Sentencing Commission plans to finalize the guidelines after public hearings and deliberation processes. The 149th plenary session, scheduled for November 6, will review amendments to sentencing guidelines for violations of the Private Loan Act and Debt Collection Act.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.