산업안전보건법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The sentence of each sentence against the Defendants shall be suspended.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., form of punishment) by the lower court against the Defendants is too unreasonable.
2. Each of the crimes of this case is recognized that the Defendants did not take necessary safety measures as a business owner or a general manager in order to prevent industrial accidents at C’s place of business, and that the Defendants’ liability for such crime is not less complicated in light of the substance of the crime
However, when the defendants were found to have committed each of the crimes of this case when they were in the trial, they are against the wrongness, and Defendant A did not have any history of criminal punishment other than the punishment of a relatively minor fine on one occasion due to the crime of this case. Defendant B is subject to the suspension of indictment due to the crime of this case, and there is no history of criminal punishment. Defendant B is also subject to criminal punishment. The violation of this case is relatively minor, and corrective measures are taken immediately after the discovery of the violation of this case, the safety accident occurred due to each of the crimes of this case, the possibility of safety accident is not high, and the possibility of the occurrence of safety accident seems to be very high, taking into account all other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as specified in the records and arguments of this case including Defendant A's age, character and behavior, environment, etc., the above assertion by the court below against the defendants is unreasonable. Thus, all of the above arguments by the defendants are justified.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendants' appeal is based on the following reasoning.
[Dao-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence acknowledged by this court is different from each of the judgments of the court below in addition to the fact that "1. Defendants' partial statement" in the summary of evidence of the court below is "1. Defendants' oral statement" as "1. Defendants' oral statement".