The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is consistent with the victim F (hereinafter referred to as the "victim")’s statement from the first police statement to the court below’s court, which was crossinged along the crosswalk installed along the crosswalk set up in the five-line line from the boundary of the reclaimed land at the time of the instant case to the rooftop apartment, to the front side of the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle from the middle point to the right side of the victim’s right side at the port of the road. The victim’s statement is consistent with the statement that the Defendant’s driver stopped on the front side of the road located on the front side of the said crosswalk, and the victim escaped, and thus, the victim has the credibility of the statement.

On the other hand, the Defendant: (a) the instant traffic accident occurred at a certain point out of the crosswalk set up on the 2nd line between Kart and E; (b) immediately after the occurrence of the accident, the Defendant was able to be punished by the victim in English by getting the window on the side of the driver’s seat after the occurrence of the accident; and (c) making a left-hand turn by making a left-hand turn at a place where a considerable amount of 5 minutes has passed since the victim was able to stop at a place where 10 meters have passed since the victim was off; (d) however, even though the Defendant who complied with the signal knew of the accident, even though he was aware of the accident, it is difficult to believe that the Defendant was stopped at a place where the accident occurred, but left without finding the victim, it is difficult to understand it as it is.

Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case on the ground that it is difficult to believe the victim's statement, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who is engaged in driving a CM car.

On September 21, 2012, the Defendant proceeded with a road of one-lane E in front of the city of 21:10 on September 13, 2012, and turn to the left at an irregular speed from the side of the reclaimed land.