All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (defendants) were unable to anticipate that there was a person operating the electric kickboard at the center of the road in which there was no street lamps at night, without lighting or reflect boards, and even if the Defendant did not have speeded, there was no causal link between the speed and the accident.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence (one year of imprisonment without prison labor and two years of suspended execution) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant argued to the same effect in the original trial.

As to this, the lower court did not accept the Defendant’s assertion and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, taking full account of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning that can be seen through the evidence duly admitted and examined.

Examining the above judgment of the court below after closely comparing it with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and the judgment below did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged above by the defendant.

B. In full view of the grounds for sentencing stated in the instant argument and the record as to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower court appears to have been reasonably determined by fully considering the various grounds for sentencing alleged by the prosecutor, and there is no special circumstance to the extent that the sentencing is modified ex post facto.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.