The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding the facts) of the defendant's fault does not cause any bicycle collision accident as stated in the facts charged.

Although the defendant was driven on a motor vehicle to avoid impeding the course of the victim, the occurrence of the above bicycle collision accident is the wind to enter the motor vehicle at the latest.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by the defendant that caused the above bicycle collision.

Since the judgment of the court below was accepted, it erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

2. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant, along with the members of the bicycle club at May 10, 2015, run the second bicycle lane from the fire-prevention bridge to the eelway. Some members of the above bicycle club run the second bicycle lane beyond the center line to the opposite direction, and even if the defendant she gets a member driving the fleet in the opposite direction (hereinafter referred to as the "raying member"), the defendant she driven the center line to the opposite direction. The victim tried to return the bicycle line to the center by observing the bicycle line and promptly finding the victim who was driving the bicycle line to the direction of return to the center, and the victim tried to return the bicycle line to the center by finding the collision between the defendant and the evising member's normal direction of return to the center. The victim tried to return the bicycle line to the middle of the collision with the evising member.