All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the scope of the construction site of the construction site (hereinafter “the construction site of this case”) as indicated in the judgment of the court below rendered by Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) supplied by N, the main building of the J gas station (hereinafter “instant gas station”) is limited to the construction of the building for the management of the foregoing gas station, and the construction of steel plates installed with the roof of the gas station where the victim was working at the time of the accident (hereinafter “the roof construction of this case”) is entirely separate from the subcontracted construction of the P Co., Ltd., the Defendant Co., Ltd. supply and demand by the O Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”).

Then, the Defendant Company entered into a contract with the State of this case to supply and demand the entire construction from the State of this case

Even if the invalidation agreement is invalid, the roof construction of this case does not fall under the scope of the Defendants’ work.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. Each sentence of the lower court (Defendant B: 9 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 2 years of suspended execution, Defendant Company: 10 million won) against the illegal Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts in the relevant legal doctrine and Article 29(3) of the Industrial Safety and Health Act should be made to prevent industrial accidents as prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Employment and Labor when a worker employed by the contractor engages in work at a place where there is a risk of industrial accidents as prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Employment and Labor.

The term "business owner under paragraph (1)" refers to a business owner under paragraph (1) of Article 29 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act, "a business that is carried on at the same place and is prescribed by Presidential Decree, among the businesses that are carried on under contract separately" (Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4802 delivered on October 28, 2005).