The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (1) The distance between the above bicycle and the Defendant’s vehicle is about 11m as of the time when the victim’s bicycle riding in the direction of the road appears as soon as the Defendant’s bicycle riding in the direction of the road appears.

Therefore, the result of the appraisal that the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle is at least 6.2m to 6.8m in order to avoid the accident; ② In light of the legal statement of the Accident Investigation Institute of Road Traffic Accident Investigation that the Defendant did not reverse the victim’s head even if the Defendant got 30cm or more, the Defendant found the victim delayed due to the Defendant’s failure to perform his/her duty of care to closely see and drive the front left left, and caused the victim’s death by not manipulating the driving vehicle immediately to the left left.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant was acquitted.

2. As stated in the judgment of the court below, if the defendant discovered the victim from the 11m earlier side of the 11m earlier and followed the victim to the left side immediately, there is room to view that the accident of this case could have been avoided.

However, the driver cannot be said to have the duty of care to prepare for the occurrence of an exceptional situation which is difficult to expect and anticipate, by fulfilling the duty of care to the extent of avoiding the result of the occurrence in preparation for an ordinary predicted situation.

(Supreme Court Decision 85Do833 delivered on July 9, 1985). Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below and the arguments of this case, the accident of this case, as shown in the judgment of the court below, is due to a very exceptional situation in which the victim, who gets on and passed the bicycle, takes over the bicycle toward the road of this case.

However, at the time of the accident in this case, the distance of time is shorter than the day after night, and it was a narrow range of time and the decision of the court below.