The defendants' appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant A does not have the right to hire safety personnel in addition to Defendant A, and Defendant A reported that it is necessary to expand additional safety personnel to the upper part before the occurrence of the instant accident. Therefore, Defendant A fulfilled its duty of care.

Defendant

B Since the management affairs of swimming instructors are subject to the full-time decision of the chief of the department, Defendant B, the president, does not have any cause attributable to him.

The sentencing of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below regarding Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts as to the grounds for appeal, it is recognized that Defendant A did not have the authority to additionally employ the safety personnel of the swimming pool of this case or the safety personnel at the time, and that Defendant A reported to the effect that Defendant A should additionally employ a swimming instructor due to the risk of an accident in the upper part before the occurrence of the accident in this case.

However, according to the above evidence, Defendant A was aware of the relevant provision that at least two water safety personnel should be assigned to a surveillance tower; the swimming pool of this case does not have any separate safety personnel and there were several safety instructors engaged in safety management duties; on the date of the accident of this case, two of four full-time instructors in p.m. are on the date of the accident of this case, and the fact that two of the four full-time instructors in p.m. are on the opening of the sports competition can be recognized. According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant A, who is the general manager at the site of the swimming pool of this case, has already been aware of the risk of safety accidents due to the shortage of safety personnel, is likely to cause more accidents than the existing full-time instructors on the date of the occurrence of the accident of this case, and thus, Defendant A ordered the full-time instructors of this case to work or properly assigned existing human resources through the reduction or adjustment of hours during the