All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A and C, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, deems it reasonable to view that: (a) if there is a concern over risk to workers due to ground collapse or falling down of earth and rocks, it may be recognized as the business owner by applying Article 50 of the Rules on Industrial Safety and Health Standards, and (b) the said Defendants, who are specialized in construction as in the instant case, could have sufficiently anticipated risks as indicated in the lower judgment; (c) there is no possibility for the said Defendants to expect installation of earth brus, etc.; and (d) determined that the causal relationship between the said Defendants’ violation of their duty and the instant accident, and thus, rejected the allegation in the grounds

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing the lower court’s fact-finding is nothing more than disputing the lower court’s determination on the choice and probative value of evidence which belongs to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. While examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of relevant statutes, legal principles and evidence duly adopted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on occupational safety and health standards, i.e., Article 50 of the Rules on Industrial Safety and Health,

2. According to the records as to the grounds of appeal by Defendant B, the above Defendant did not submit the grounds of appeal within a legitimate period despite receiving a notice of receipt of the record of appeal against the judgment of the first instance, and the court below dismissed Defendant’s appeal on this ground.

In such a case, the above defendant cannot be deemed as the ground for appeal on the ground that there was an error of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment below, just as in the case of

Supreme Court Decision 196No. 1996