Gwangju 'Collapse Disaster' Responsible Parties Deny Some Charges Including Negligent Homicide

7 Construction Officials and 3 Companies Attend First Trial After Case Consolidation

Defendants Shift Blame Over 'Excessive Watering' as Cause of Building Collapse

The Gwangju Hakdong Disaster Citizens' Countermeasures Committee is holding a press conference on the 18th urging a strict judgment against HDC Hyundai Development Company. / Photo by Jin-Hyung Park bless4ya@

[Asia Economy Honam Reporting Headquarters Reporter Park Jin-hyung] The responsible parties indicted for causing the Gwangju Hakdong building collapse denied some of the charges at the first trial held after the cases were consolidated.

The Criminal Division 11 of the Gwangju District Court (Presiding Judge Jeong Ji-seon) held a trial on the 18th at courtroom 201 of the Gwangju District Court for seven construction-related individuals and three companies (HDC Hyundai Development Company, Hansol Construction, Baeksol Construction) charged with professional negligence resulting in injury or death.

They were indicted for causing the collapse of a building under demolition in Hakdong 4 District on June 9, which resulted in 17 casualties, by failing to properly implement safety management and supervision.

The defendants include ▲ Hyundai Development Company site manager Seo (57), safety manager Kim (57), and public works manager Noh (53) ▲ Hansol Construction site manager Kang (28), a subcontractor for general building demolition ▲ Kim (49), site manager of Daewon ENC, a subcontractor for asbestos removal, and site supervisor Cha (59) ▲ Baeksol Construction CEO and excavator operator Jo (47), a secondary subcontractor.

The Hyundai Development Company’s lawyer stated, "Our position is that the general duty of care imposed on the contractor under the Building Management Act does not include the cause of the accident," adding, "There is room to dispute the professional negligence causing death or injury charge."

Regarding the violation of the Industrial Safety and Health Act, they said, "We plan to dispute later whether the work plan and other documents were actually implemented."

The lawyer for Baeksol Construction, which actually carried out the demolition work, explained, "We acknowledge the basic facts but deny some specific negligence," adding, "We did not foresee that excessive water spraying caused the building collapse, and above all, the defendant did not directly perform the act."

The Hansol Construction lawyer argued, "The prosecution claims negligence due to non-compliance with demolition methods and artificial demolition work, but while some of this is acknowledged, it is difficult to see a causal relationship between non-compliance with demolition methods and the building collapse."

They also said, "We understand that the driver at the time ignored the signalman's hand signals and entered," adding, "There is no obligation to take safety measures in advance anticipating that the driver would ignore and enter."

Regarding excessive water spraying, they requested leniency, stating, "While negligence and causality are recognized, there were circumstances where the subcontractor could not refuse the instructions of the primary contractor, Hyundai Development Company."

In other words, the two subcontractors, Hansol as the first-tier subcontractor and Baeksol as the second-tier subcontractor, attributed the 'excessive water spraying,' considered one of the causes of the building collapse, to the fault of Hyundai Development Company.

The lawyer for Daewon ENC stated, "We were only responsible for the asbestos removal part related to this accident," and denied, "We only checked the status of equipment and personnel deployed for the project to settle profits with Hansol, and had no authority to manage or supervise the entire construction."

The prosecution also submitted additional evidence to prove the charges against the defendants on the day.

The court plans to hold a trial on November 1 at 10:30 a.m. to examine documentary evidence. On the same day at 2 p.m., the first witness examination of site supervisor Cha will take place.

The key issues in this case are whether Hyundai Development Company was aware of the illegal subcontracting in advance and the investigation into the cause of the building collapse.

Meanwhile, the legal representatives of the victims participating in the trial stated, "While it is important to clarify the cause of the accident and the responsibility of each defendant, several months have passed since the tragedy, and there has been no agreement between Hyundai Development Company and the bereaved families," urging, "We hope to have legal disputes while discussing victim recovery."