1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Defendant I respectively to Plaintiff A, 77,016,010 won, Plaintiff B, C, and D.

1. Basic facts

A. (1) The status of the parties (1) Defendant G is the captain of the tugboat J (K; hereinafter “instant tugboat”); Defendant H is the captain of the barge L (M; hereinafter “instant barge”); Defendant E (hereinafter “E”) is the owner of the instant tugboat and the barge, as Defendant G and H users.

(2) Defendant I, along with the network N (hereinafter “the network”), was a person boarding the instant barge; Defendant F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) is a company engaged in construction business, such as asbestos dismantling work and roof improvement work; Defendant I is registered as an internal director; and the Deceased is registered as an employee.

(3) The plaintiff A is the deceased's spouse, and the plaintiff B, C, and D are the deceased's children.

B. (1) On March 21, 2012, the instant tugboat departed from the port located in the Gunsan-dong, Gunsan-si on March 21, 2012 with construction materials, such as sand, in towing the instant barge, and departing from the port to the Cheongdo-do, located on the rooftop map of the same city.

(2) At around 20:20 on the same day, the instant tugboat had rapidly changed the direction on the left side in order to avoid obstacles (construe) at the sea of approximately 8-math day in the south East East East East East East-do. In the process, the Deceased, who was on the right side of the boat of the instant barge, was killed by a external shock (presumed) at around 21:00 on the same day, when the instant tugboat was under a strong string with a strong tension, and was faced with the left part of the tugboat on the towing color, which entered into the right side of the boat. (hereinafter “instant accident”), and was killed by a external shock (presumed) at around 21:0 on the same day.

(3) Defendant G was recognized as a crime of occupational death against the Deceased due to the instant accident, and was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2,000,000 by the Jeonju District Court’s Gunsan Branch Decision 2012 Go-Ma738 on March 13, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on March 21, 2013.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's 1 to 4, 7, 8, and Eul's 8 shall include each entry number.