2. Under the title of “not guilty portion”, the lower court, based on the two-party 2-party 21 to 7-party 5 of the judgment, explained in detail the various facts and circumstances recognized by the relevant legal principles and evidence. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is doubtful that the Defendant did not flee even if he did not have been aware of the occurrence of a traffic accident, but it is insufficient to view that the facts charged are proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and on the ground that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the violation of the Road Traffic Act (the measures not taken after the accident) among the facts charged in the instant case, and dismissed the prosecution as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, which is related to the crime.

Examining the judgment of the court below closely by comparing it with the records, the fact-finding and judgment of the court below are just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles as pointed out by the prosecutor, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, prosecutor's above mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.