All appeals filed by the Defendants and by the Prosecutor against Defendant A are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (misunderstanding of facts as to the death by occupational negligence and violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Act and misapprehension of legal principle) charged Defendant A with the instant accident on the sole ground that Defendant A was negligent in carrying out construction without properly removing earth and stones dangerous to abortion, and even if part of the wall for the protection of climatic devices, which is an installation to prevent the risk of abortion, was removed. Nevertheless, the lower court did not order the victims to not enter or stop their maintenance and repair work even though the victims were aware of the maintenance and repair work at the time, and even if the victims were not aware of this, the lower court did not order the victims to take an appropriate work instruction, and even if the victims were not negligent in performing such duty, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the negligence of the prosecutor.

② In addition, Defendant A instructed K to send a large portion of the stones by doing so with the bracker’s bracker work, and even if Defendant A did not instruct K to do so.

Even if so, it is basic common sense to conduct the softer's work, so there is no obligation for Defendant A to specifically instruct K.

③ At the time of the instant accident, Defendant A did not instruct the victims to repair the facilities for the protection of crushing, and the victims could not have anticipated that they had been at all at the site of the instant accident because they were not at the scene of the instant accident.

Ultimately, Defendant A’s occupational duty.