The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant operated the speed of time exceeding 23.3 km per hour, the victim's error is close to one lane, and the defendant could avoid collision with the driver's error of the victim if he would have avoided overtaking while complying with the regulatory speed. In light of the above, direct and indirect causation between the defendant's speed driving and the occurrence of the accident is recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the charges on different premise. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is a person who is engaged in driving a bus B and C.

On February 10, 2019, the Defendant driven a bus around 20:55, and proceeded at about 71.3 km each hour from the intersection to the intersection of a mountain intersection in the direction of the determination of the city Viewing road No. 8 located in the Seosan-dong, Busan.

At this point, the speed limit is 60 km per hour, and at the time, and the surface is milched because it is night, so a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by driving the steering gear and brake system accurately and driving it.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and went beyond the road by driving the EMAX 155cc U. S. to the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, which was driven by the victim D(the age of 31) who was in progress prior to the two-lanes on the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, in the vicinity of the EMAX 155cc U.S. and caused the victim to go beyond the road by taking the following parts on the left side of the victim’s vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant’s negligence on the part of the above business is weak to the victim.