The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The conviction in a criminal trial shall be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to have a judge correct doubt as to the facts charged, and if there is no such proof, even if there is any doubt as to the defendant's guilt, the conviction cannot be judged as guilty (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do735, Apr. 27, 2006, etc.). Furthermore, the preparation of evidence and the probative value of evidence conducted as the premise of fact finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court (Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). The lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, cannot be deemed to have proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the fact-finding that the Defendants violated the safety measures obligation under the Industrial Safety and Health Act, and thus, rejected the first deliberation judgment which acquitted the Defendants of the facts charged of this case, and rejected the prosecutor's allegation on the grounds for appeal as to the facts of fact.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of the lower court as above, and it is nothing more than denying the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which belongs to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the relevant legal principles and records in the first instance trial, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of free ex officio principle by violating logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the grounds for taking safety measures and the violation of the Industrial Safety and Health Act

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.