The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was not negligent in performing his duty of care, but the victim suffered injury from the running of lapul in lupululse or the net loss.

Nevertheless, the defendant violated his duty of care.

In light of the facts charged, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. Sentencing (Punishment of the lower court: Fines 1,000,000)

2. Determination

가. 사실 오인 주장에 대한 판단 원심은 그 판시와 같이 트램펄린에서 성인이 뛸 경우 그 반동 때문에 옆에 있던 유아들이 중심을 잡지 못하고 넘어질 수 있고 유아들은 넘어지면서 스스로 자신의 몸을 보호할 수 있는 능력이 없기 때문에 성인이 유아와 함께 트램펄린에서 뛸 때는 유아의 손을 잡고 함께 뛰거나 유아가 반동으로 넘어지지 않도록 유의하며 큰 반동을 일으키지 않도록 해야 할 주의의무가 있음에도 피고인은 이러한 주의의무를 게을리 한 채 피해자의 옆에서 큰 반동을 일으키며 뛴 과실이 있다고

In light of the facts charged, the defendant was convicted.

Examining the judgment of the court below closely by comparing the record with the record, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

Defendant

The argument is without merit.

B. The lower court’s judgment as to the wrongful assertion of sentencing is that the Defendant was the primary offender, without intention, and the injury inflicted on the victim who is a young child is very significant and, therefore, the treatment and rehabilitation of the victim is most important. However, in the situation where the Defendant’s self-sufficiency is insufficient, it is highly necessary to pay the amount of civil agreement sufficient to the part of the victim. In addition, the Defendant’s criminal history, age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and means of the crime;