The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

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 traffic accident.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to occupational negligence, which is an element of the crime of violation of the Traffic Accident Settlement Act

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment without prison labor, two years of suspension of execution, 80 hours of community service order, and 40 hours of attendance order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On November 24, 2017, the Defendant: (a) driven a freight truck B D (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) around 17:00 on November 24, 2017; and (b) had the roads next to the latter part of C elementary school located at the Jeju-si (hereinafter “instant vehicle”); and (c) had the Japanese consular guard from E to the Japanese consular guard.

Since there is a protective zone for children, there was a duty of care to drive a motor vehicle with due care in consideration of the front, rear, and left and right of the motor vehicle driver.

Nevertheless, due to negligent occupational negligence, the Defendant did not discover the Victim F (7 years of age) who is a child crossing the said road to the right side from the left side of the running direction of the instant vehicle, and was led to about 8 meters by the front part of the instant vehicle, leading the victim's body part, leading about the victim's body part, and suffered injury, such as two heats and deficits, requiring approximately 6 weeks of treatment.

B. The lower court’s judgment determined that the following circumstances revealed through the evidence duly adopted and examined, ① the point where the instant traffic accident occurred is located near the distance between people and vehicles, and around 3 meters from the end of the crosswalk, and ② the Defendant’s wife was attending the D Elementary School at the time of the instant traffic accident, and thus, the Defendant was involved in the instant traffic accident.