The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. 검사의 항소이유의 요지(사실오인) 이 사건 사고로 인한 충격의 정도, 피고인도 이 사건 사고 당시 ‘쿵’ 하는 소리를 들었던 점, 이 사건 사고 이후 최초로 피해자들을 만났을 때 자신이 모두 책임지겠다며 명함을 주고 피해자들을 돌려보낸 점, 당시 피고인의 얼굴이 약간 붉었던 것으로 보아 음주운전이 의심되는 점 등과 같은 사정들을 종합하여 보면, 피고인은 이 사건 사고 당시 사고사실을 미필적으로라도 인식하고 있었음이 분명하다.

2. The lower court determined: (a) the instant accident is an accident that collisions with the damaged vehicle that Defendant’s vehicle that was driven behind and was trying to walk in the intersection with the direction of the Corporation when the Defendant’s vehicle was at the intersection of the luminous distance; (b) there is no particular damage except the string of the Defendant’s vehicle and the damaged vehicle’s wheel; (c) the following part of the vehicle is indicated in the repair cost of the damaged vehicle as KRW 1,031,50 on the estimate but the repair cost of the damaged vehicle is KRW 708,984; and (d) the actual repair cost of the damaged vehicle was merely KRW 230,00,00; and (d) the Defendant was waiting to put the damaged vehicle to the left to the left to the direction of the Defendant’s house after the accident; and (d) the Defendant was able to see the Defendant’s vehicle after the accident, making it difficult to see the Defendant’s vehicle’s vehicle that was at the seat of the Defendant’s vehicle after the accident.