The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. It is doubtful as to whether an injured person as to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) governance of the pedestrian crossing.

In the case of the defendant's vehicle, there is a flusing country on the part of the victim.

If the damaged person reports the front, it is difficult for the damaged person to face.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant did not see the victim who was crossing and caused the injury to the victim due to the negligence bypassing the victim while crossing the victim's signals (On the other hand, there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that green is left by the defendant's vehicle, and that the victim was a guard of the portrait color series, as alleged by the defendant.

Even if the victim is not completely added to his/her body or the side of his/her body is faced with.

Even if the victim gets off the left shoulder part in the court below's decision, the victim gets off the defendant's vehicle.

The defendant's vehicle was reported to the left side while the victim gets on the crosswalk, and the possibility that the victim returned to avoid this cannot be ruled out at all.

In addition, one victim is aware that he was knenee knee knee knee knee knee and knee knee is broken.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.