The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds of appeal is that the instant traffic accident cannot be applied to the principle of trust, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant traffic accident, even though the Defendant was negligent in neglecting the duty of care and care, even though it could have anticipated that the victim, who was a remote victim, would lose his center, may enter the road.

2. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of D urban buses owned by C.

On November 6, 2012, the Defendant driven the above bus at around 22:55, and started driving three-lanes of the three-lanes in front of the Suwon-dong Office 173-3, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Suwon-gu, Seoul, along the two-lanes in the basin of the river basin, while driving the three-lanes of the three-lanes of the bus at the bus stops in the Suwon-dong 3-dong Office.

At the time, a crosswalk is installed near the central bus stop at night, and there is a place adjacent to it, so the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to safely drive the crosswalk and prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, by negligence of neglecting the duty of the brupt, the Defendant caused the victim E (the age of 57) to cut off the crosswalk to the port from the right side of the direction of the Defendant’s running.

Ultimately, on November 9, 2012, the Defendant caused the death of the victim by occupational negligence, resulting in the death of the brain function math in the G Hospital located in Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the adopted evidence, the lower court’s judgment: (a) The point where the instant traffic accident occurred is the one-lane crosswalk of the three-lane road along which the central bus exclusive lanes are installed; and (b) the Defendant is at a bus stop located at approximately 15 meters thereafter.