The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It cannot be deemed that there was an occupational negligence on the part of the defendant at the time of the instant accident.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on occupational negligence, which is an element for the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The Defendant asserts that the sentence (one year of imprisonment without prison labor and two years of suspended execution) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the sentence is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment on the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by the defendant

A. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a B-B-B-B car.

On January 12, 2019, around 20:35, the Defendant proceeded straight along the three-lane road from the right edge to the duct in the direction of the duct.

At the time, the surrounding view is not well secured. In such a case, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to reduce the speed and to accurately manipulate the steering direction and brake system after he saw well the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right, thereby preventing the accident from being delayed.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and proceeded along as it is, by negligence, got the victim D(54) who has dried a road from the left side of the road to the right side of the defendant's driving direction and got the victim to go beyond the road.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the death of the victim due to the above occupational negligence by brain injury in the workplace.

B. The lower court’s determination is based on the following circumstances revealed through the evidence duly adopted and examined: (i) the point where the instant accident occurred was a road with two lanes wide from each other; and (ii) the vehicle entry prevention salary is installed on the center line near the point where the accident occurred.