A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

2. Determination of each of the crimes of this case is an unfavorable circumstance where the Defendant committed the death of the victim D in breach of the duty to take measures under the Occupational Safety and Health Act and the duty to exercise the duty of care, and there is a record of punishment for the same kind of crime (two times the crime of death by occupational negligence, and three times the crime of violation of the Occupational Safety

However, in full view of all other circumstances that are favorable to the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, career and occupation, circumstances of crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions of this case as shown in the records, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, etc., environment, career and occupation, circumstance of crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too unreasonable, and thus it is judged that the defendant's allegation of unfair sentencing is unfair since the defendant's punishment is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court are identical to facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 66-2, Article 23 (1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (the occupation of death or injury caused by industrial accident prevention) and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of the penalty;