The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the evidence of this case, the court below acquitted the defendant on the ground that the defendant's negligence of duty of care was not recognized, despite the fact that the defendant neglected to perform his duty of care and caused death. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court determined as follows, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant continued to cross-section at normal speed (52 km per hour) according to the driver’s green signal. At that time, the victim met the Defendant’s vehicle by waiting for the signal on the opposite side of the vehicle running by the Defendant and waiting for the signal on the opposite side. The victim met the Defendant’s vehicle. The victim was crossing the crosswalk near the crosswalk in the intersection (road not above the crosswalk), and the victim went beyond the median line, was shocked by the Defendant’s vehicle crossing in the direction of the first line. At that time, the Defendant was 18:30 square meters at that time, and the fact that the Defendant was found to have carried the intersection at that time, i.e., pedestrians at that time, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the said pedestrian, i.e., the victim was somewhat unable at that time, and the victim was waiting for the front speed of the vehicle with the front speed more than 5 meters prior to the accident.