All appeals filed by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing) sentenced by the court below to the defendant A, B, and C (the 10-month imprisonment, the suspended sentence of 10 months, the 2-year imprisonment, the 8-month imprisonment, and the suspended sentence of 2 years) is too uneasible.

B. Defendant B, Co., Ltd. 1) The basic support stand-up project on the part of the occupational injury, occupational injury, and traffic interference between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff is the owner’s duty. The Defendants fulfilled their duty of care in the establishment of the tea in the instant case.

B) As part of the violation of the Industrial Safety and Health Act due to the failure to certify safety, the basic support stand of the instant lockers was constructed with concretes on the floor, and thus, it was not subject to safety certification.

C) The duty to prepare and keep a work plan on the part of the violation of the remaining Industrial Safety and Health Act, the duty to maintain the safety of structures or similar facilities, measures to be taken in the course of conducting a work, such as assembling cream, etc. are merely the duty of the owner of the building, who is the business owner, and does not constitute the duty of the

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is excessively unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

A and C (Cheating of Sentencing) The sentence imposed by the lower court to the Defendants is excessively unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion that Defendant B and D are erroneous in facts

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the following facts can be acknowledged.

1) Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) is a company established for the purpose of the business of leasing wree, the business of installing, dismantling, and managing wreewre, etc., and Defendant B is the representative director of the Defendant Co., Ltd.

2) Defendant B requested Defendant A to lease the instant workshop (R; hereinafter referred to as “the instant lifts”) at the construction site, and visited Defendant A at the construction site of the instant case around August 25, 2015.