A. Defendant (1) The Seoul Special Metropolitan City branch office of the Road Traffic Authority presumed the victim's entry from the center of India to the front roadway prior to around 0.6 to 0.8 meters, and presumed the distance between the bus and the shocking point at the time to be about 7-8 meters, and judged that there was a high possibility of avoiding accident if a pedestrian becomes aware of a pedestrian when entering the front roadway of the bus, but it was erroneous in the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty on the ground of the black image of the bus which is not the bus driver but the bus driver's exit and is different from the bus driver's exit.

(2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 7 million) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (7 million won) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts. As the court below properly pointed out, the defendant is not obliged to examine the right side side of the bus in case where the three bus stops beyond the center line, and immediately after the defendant is overtaken by the left side of the bus, and the right side side side of the bus has not been secured during the overtaking. Thus, if the defendant fulfilled his duty of care, he could promptly find the victim who was crossing without permission while violating the crosswalk signal on the defendant's right side side side side of the passage side at the time of the instant case (the defendant's failure to comply with the signal prior to the arrival of the center and the victim who was crossing without permission will cross the bus on the front side of the bus of the defendant is within the scope of ordinary predictability.

Therefore, the court below's violation of the Defendant's duty of care in front of the instant traffic accident is also the cause of the instant traffic accident.