The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. At the time of the accident charged with the facts charged, the driving by the defendant was done in violation of the duty of care that the ordinary bus driver should pay. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the duty of safe driving and thereby acquitted the defendant.

2. The lower court determined, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, that it cannot be readily concluded that the act of driving by the Defendant at the time was highly likely to cause danger and harm to others, and otherwise, it is difficult to view the Defendant as a driver that violated

In light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the following facts are revealed: ① the victim illegally crosses the central bus exclusive lane in the direction of the central bus; ② the victim's unauthorized crossing is difficult to anticipate the victim's unauthorized crossing (in contrast to the prosecutor's assertion, it is not a place to attempt to cross the central bus crossing without permission); ② there is no possibility that the defendant could anticipate or avoid an accident because the victim stopped between the two bus bus stops on the right side of the defendant's driving direction; ③ the defendant seems to drive the central bus exclusive after the lapse of the central bus stop; and ③ there is no circumstance to deem the defendant driving the central bus exclusive by the method that could cause danger, and there is no circumstance to see that the defendant driven the central bus exclusive lane in the direction of the central bus stop; and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles as argued by the prosecutor, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.