1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A and D, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting Defendant A and D of the death by occupational negligence among the facts charged in the instant case for reasons indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as stated in the grounds of appeal and by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules

2. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant B and G, the lower court convicted Defendant B and G of the instant facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on the principle of legality, the principle of law at the time of an act, the principle of trust, the principle of liability for an act, and

3. As to Defendant E’s grounds of appeal, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting Defendant E of the instant facts charged, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the grounds for appeal in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on the content of duty of care or the existence of causation of occupational injury or death.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only a case on which death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is permitted. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on Defendant E, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not

4. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed.