The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, as the representative director of D, a corporation operating Dart, violated the duty of care to prevent the customer from slicking accidents by removing the water source of the Mart floor.

2. The lower court, with detailed reasoning and the evidence alone presented by the prosecutor, has an occupational duty to prevent accidents by removing the body of the floor.

It is difficult to see that employees did not fulfill their duty to direct or supervise the removal of floor floor water, and that the Defendant was acquitted on the grounds that there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. The judgment of the court below is just and acceptable when comparing the reasoning of the judgment below with the records.

3. Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.