C All appeals filed by both C and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. At the time of the instant accident, the captain directly adjusted the vessel, as stated in Article 9(1) of the Seafarers’ Act and Article 4-2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Seafarers’ Act, on the ground that the captain’s “if the vessel meets the Gun of a fishing vessel or significantly increases the traffic volume of the sea route during navigation” was observed by the captain of the vessel in front of the instant accident, and Q sail sails around the port.

of the corporation.

Therefore, according to the evidence submitted, even if the defendant's failure to directly coordinate the ship is recognized as an occupational negligence, and all of the facts charged as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the escape from the ship's traffic accident), the court below acquitted the

B. The lower court recognized the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, and based on this, proved that this part of the facts charged is beyond reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see

The Court rendered a not-guilty verdict.

Examining the various circumstances cited by the lower court in a thorough and consistent manner with the record, there is no reasonable circumstance to deem that the lower court’s determination of evidence was clearly erroneous or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts is significantly unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules.

We do not accept the Prosecutor’s assertion that the lower judgment erred by mistake in fact on the premise different from this premise.

2. In comparison with the lower court’s judgment on the prosecutor’s unfair argument of sentencing on Defendant A and B, there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and where the lower court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, this ought to be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, the fact that the victimized vessel was negligent for the instant accident, and the bereaved family members of the victim JJ are the Defendants.