A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles have fulfilled the duty of occupational care, such as the duty of front-time care at the time of the instant accident, and the victim was able to illegally cross the crosswalk at the point where 4.5 meters higher than the crosswalk and the accident occurred, so the principle of trust protection shall be applied. Therefore, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have been negligent in the course of business

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment without prison labor, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the circumstances as stated in the judgment of the court below can be acknowledged, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence are as follows. In other words, the defendant, at the point where the defendant was employed at the time of the accident at the time of the accident, left the road to the right right at the front of the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”) in front of the front door of the road at the point where approximately 4.5 meters are left, and the victim crossing the road from the right side of the defendant's driving at the right side of the bus at a speed of about 17 kilometers in speed, the defendant was driving at a speed of about 17 kilometers in speed, and the point where the defendant's bus was shocked by the victim is near the center line of the right side of the two-lane road, and at least the victim was installed at the time of the accident or the pedestrian crossing, and the defendant had not been employed at the time of the accident or the passage.