2. The fact that the Defendant appears to have the attitude of recognizing and opposing the crime, that the victim’s bereaved family members paid insurance money equivalent to KRW 82 million to the victim’s bereaved family members, and that there was an agreement to additionally pay KRW 10 million prior to the pronouncement of the lower judgment, and that there was no record of having been sentenced to the same type of crime or of having been sentenced to suspended execution

However, in this case, the victim died due to the occurrence of an accident due to the Defendant’s violation of the Defendant’s duty to take safety measures, and even if the risk of the victim’s work process (the movement of heavy glass), it seems that safety measures or the education of employees for the prevention of accidents were very insufficient. However, considering the degree and result of the violation, the degree and result of the violation, and all of the sentencing conditions in the instant argument, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is rejected.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.