The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence (five million won penalty) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As new sentencing data are not submitted at the trial court, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s judgment, and the circumstances alleged by the Defendant due to unfair reasons for sentencing are deemed to have already been reflected in the sentencing grounds of the lower court. The instant crime is deemed to have led to the death of the victim due to the failure to implement industrial safety preventive measures, such as paying safety caps to the victim who works at risk of fall, wearing, etc., and thus, the result of the crime was significant, and other various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, degree of damage, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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