The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A In four months of imprisonment, Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 7,00,000 won, and Defendant C shall be punished by a fine of 5.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (Defendant A: 4 months of imprisonment; Defendant B: imprisonment without prison labor for 4 months; imprisonment for 2 years of probation; imprisonment for 4 months; imprisonment for 3 years of probation; imprisonment for 2 years of probation; and Defendant D: fine for 5 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A and B of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We examine the above arguments of the Defendants and the prosecutor together with the above arguments. The crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance against the Defendants, on the ground that the Defendants did not install safety devices, such as a work plate, a safety room, and a safety galking facility, on the ground that the Defendants had the victim work at a height of 4 meters, but only for the reason that the expenses were incurred, resulting in an serious result of the victim’s death, and the liability for such crime is not less complicated, and Defendant C and D had the previous two times of fines.

On the other hand, however, this case should have left the pipe connections flocks prior to the misunderstanding of the error before leaving the pipe. However, the victim who completely dissatised this to a certain extent is liable for the whole dissatising.

In addition, the victim's bereaved family members are paid the bereaved family's benefits through industrial accident compensation insurance, and in addition, the defendants receive a total of KRW 70 million from the court below and the court below's decision, and the defendants do not want the punishment of the defendants. The defendants are detained in this case and they are against their own mistakes. The defendant A seems to have a certain degree of time of self-esteem. In particular, the defendant B, C, and D are making efforts to install safety facilities, increase the number of persons in exclusive charge of safety, conduct safety education, conduct regular inspections, strengthen safety management for collaborative companies, etc., so that the accident after this case is not repeated, and the defendant A and B are the primary offenders, and in other cases, there are favorable circumstances for the defendants.