The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

Criminal facts have to be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the selection of evidence and probative value of evidence conducted on the premise of fact finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court.

(Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). For reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal on mistake of facts on the ground that the Defendant violated the signal at the time of the instant accident and escaped without relief measures.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing such a judgment by the lower court is merely an error of the lower court’s determination of evidence and probative value, which belong to the free judgment by the fact-finding court.

In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence inconsistent with logical and empirical rules, or by violating the principle of presumption of innocence, the principle of presumption of

In addition, the grounds of appeal purporting to the effect that the facts recognized by the lower court while making a judgment are erroneous in incomplete deliberation and mistake of facts are the grounds of unfair sentencing.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, the above assertion falling under the grounds of unfair sentencing cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided by all participating Justices.