Judgment

It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not change the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and if the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is somewhat different from the appellate court’s view, it is desirable to reverse the first instance judgment and sentence that does not vary from the first instance court’s judgment (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal principles, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not vary from the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance judgment is somewhat different from the appellate court’s view (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal principles, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing between the lower court and the lower court and the lower court, and the Defendant’s act of occupational accident resulting in the victim’s death as a violation of safety obligation.

In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.