The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal did not constitute a violation of the central line of the bicycle lane at the time of the instant accident, and even though the witness C and D of the lower court stated that they did not directly witness the central line, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of the judgment, i.e., C’s investigation agency and the court below’s summary of the statement in the case of this case at its proceeding, and the defendant committed a collision with himself, which correspond to the facts charged in the case of this case, ii) it is consistent with C’s argument by stating that the accident occurred at the front side of the proceeding lane while getting on and off the bicycle following C, and there is no particular circumstance to suspect the credibility of D’s statement, iii) the defendant stated in the investigative agency that “the defendant conflicts with the bicycle, which was listed in the last opposite part of the time when the bicycle chain takes 2 to 3 seconds, after considering the fact that the accident of this case was caused by the negligence of the defendant, such as the collision, and the mistake of facts and the misapprehension of legal principles by the defendant’s assertion is without merit.” In full view of the circumstances such as the fact that the defendant was considered to have neglected the duty of the front line immediately before the accident.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.