All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Error of facts (Defendant A) The Defendant is not the business owner of the instant E-recycling center, but the worker F, who handled the styp crushing machine at the time of the instant accident, did not use the stypization machine or did not have any danger even if he used the stypization machine. Therefore, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have failed to take necessary measures to prevent risks caused by machinery and equipment. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which recognized the establishment of the Defendant’s violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Act on a different premise.
B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: a fine of 1.5 million won, Defendant B: a fine of 4 million won) is too unreasonable.
A. On the other hand, the court below also argued the same purport in the judgment of the court below, and the court below found the defendant guilty of the charges of this case by compiling the evidence duly adopted and investigated. On the other hand, the court below rejected the defendant's above argument on the grounds of detailed reasons in the part of "decision on the defendant A and his defense counsel's assertion." The court below's judgment that found the defendant guilty of the charges of this case is just, and the judgment of the court below is not erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and there is no error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment (the same applies when considering the contents of K's trial statement at the court below).
B. Although Defendants agreed with F and E as victims on the assertion of unfair sentencing, there are favorable circumstances, such as the fact that Defendants B and Defendant B recognized their mistakes in the course of trial and reflects their depth. Meanwhile, each of the crimes of this case in light of the degree of injury suffered by F and so forth, the nature of each of the crimes of this case is inconsistent.