2. The judgment is based on the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime as a primary offender; (b) the Defendant was committing the instant crime while employing the victim temporarily and carrying out painting work; and (c) the Defendant was not able to obtain any benefit from the painting work; and (d) the circumstances favorable to the Defendant.

However, in full view of all the circumstances, including the motive of the instant crime, the character and conduct of the Defendant, the environment, family relationship, etc., and the circumstances after the Defendant committed the instant crime, where the Defendant was negligent in taking basic safety measures while employing and working for the victim, resulting in the death of the victim by occupational negligence, and the nature of the relevant crime is heavy, and the consequences of damage are very serious, the victim’s bereaved family members did not agree with or recover from damage, and other various circumstances, which are the conditions for sentencing as stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including the motive of the instant crime, the character and conduct of the Defendant, the environment, family relationship, etc.,

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.