The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);

(a) A violation of the jurisdiction of the United States Armed Forces is an act during the performance of official duties of the United States Armed Forces, and according to Article 22(3)(a)(ii) of the Agreement between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America on Facilities and Areas and the Status of United States Armed Forces in the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Agreement”) under Article 4 of the Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America, in the event of a crime during the performance of official duties of the United States Armed Forces, the Republic of Korea shall not have jurisdiction over this case

Nevertheless, the court below erred in finding the Defendant guilty on the instant case as having jurisdiction over the Republic of Korea.

B. Where a traffic accident occurs during the performance of official duties by an insurance or mutual aid organization under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, the victim may be compensated for damage from the Republic of Korea in accordance with the State Compensation Procedure, as provided by Article 23(5)(a) of the instant Agreement, which is ultimately subject to insurance or mutual aid under the main sentence of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning

Therefore, the court below erred in finding a guilty of the dismissal of prosecution by applying the main sentence of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

C. The instant accident without fault by the Defendant is not caused by the Defendant’s negligence because the Defendant’s accident occurred due to the Defendant’s failure to stop or avoid reporting the Defendant’s vehicle departing from the first three-lanes, which the damage taxi departing from the second two-lanes, and thereby driving close to the third-lanes.

As a result of injury and damage, this case is merely a minor accident to the extent that the injured taxi driver can do so, and thus, the victim E cannot be deemed to have suffered the injury of 2 weeks due to this, and the victim E cannot be deemed to have suffered the injury of her flag, the color flag is lost by her flaging, and the place where the back part of the quilab is the back part of the taxi flag is the accident.