The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, although the causal relationship between the defendant's negligence in violation of speed and the safety distance and the victim's death can be acknowledged.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s act of driving along the two lanes and the distance between the point where the lane was changed to the point where the lane was changed to the one lane and the point where the K was located on the road is 24 meters. Since the stop distance of an automobile driving at the speed of 48km is 24.5m or 28.5m, even if the Defendant was driving near the point of the instant accident at the speed of 48km, the Defendant cannot avoid driving the vehicle at the speed of 48km. Thus, the Defendant cannot be said to have a causal relationship between the negligence driving at a speed exceeding the restricted speed of the point of the instant accident and the death of K, and even if the Defendant’s act of safely maintaining the distance from the vehicle driving along the following along the vehicle, the purpose of the norm demanding the following vehicles to maintain the distance from the vehicle driving ahead of the following vehicle is to prevent the change of the vehicle from causing the change of the vehicle at the speed of the accident. Thus, it cannot be said that the Defendant’s negligence did not change the vehicle from the previous vehicle.