The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for four months, and Defendant B.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

(In fact, the accident of this case is caused by the victimJ who was on the part of the Contact as a result of the operation of the Contact while neglecting the duty to take safety protection measures to prevent the danger of safety accidents due to the operation of the Contact, such as confirming whether there is a person around the machinery or inside the Contact prior to the process of the removal of the Contact, and the victimJ who was on the part of the Contact was negligent in performing the duty of care due to the accident that occurred within the dangerous area. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the defendants A, B, C, D, and E, who neglected the duty of care due to the accident that occurred within the dangerous area under the above duty of care.

Defendant

A and B’s ex officio determination of the facts charged at the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the judgment of the trial of the court below, and the following facts charged were applied for an amendment to a bill of amendment to a bill of amendment. Since the judgment of the court below was modified

However, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts as to the primary facts of this case is still subject to this court's determination, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

[Preliminary Facts charged] Defendant B is the Deputy Director of Management of Company E, Inc., Ltd., the purpose of which is to produce aggregate, and Defendant A is the production subsidiary member of the above company.

On the other hand, in the case of the E-factory (the machine in which the stones are well attached) it is being done.