The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Inasmuch as the Defendant is recognized as having expressed a direct driving signal of a traffic police officer at the time of the instant case, the Defendant also constitutes a violation of the Road Traffic Act due to a traffic police officer’s violation of the Road Traffic Act.

B. The sentence of the lower court (a minor fine of KRW 30,00) is too unfluent and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The evidence presented by the prosecutor as to the assertion of mistake of facts alone is that the defendant sent a direct driving signal to the traffic police officer at the time of the instant case.

There is insufficient evidence to acknowledge it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error of mistake as to the facts alleged by the prosecutor, and the prosecutor's assertion is not accepted

B. In light of the circumstances revealed in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, and details and degree of violation of the Road Traffic Act, the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and is not deemed unfair, and thus, the Prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing is not acceptable.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.