All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Examining the evidence adopted by the first instance court and the lower court in light of the relevant legal principles, the lower court’s finding the Defendants guilty of all the charges of this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there are no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the duty of care in the crime of injury by occupational negligence, causation, predictability, grounds for the rejection of illegality, etc.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or finding facts concerning the business in the crime of injury by occupational negligence shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged by Defendant D only when it comes to the final appeal that the court below did not regard it as the ground for appeal or ex officio.

Even if examined ex officio, there is no error as alleged in the judgment below.

Meanwhile, according to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing may be filed only where the court below rendered a sentence of death or imprisonment with or without prison labor for an indefinite term or for not less

Therefore, in this case where a more minor punishment is imposed against Defendant C, an appeal is not allowed to be filed with the Supreme Court on the grounds that the amount of punishment is unreasonable.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.