The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The gist of the prosecutor’s appeal is that, in full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, even if the defendant could be found to have caused the instant traffic accident due to negligence in the course of his occupational negligence over the central line while driving Orab, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

However, a digital analysis report prepared by an appraiser of the National Scientific Investigation Institute L which has been established at the site at the time of the instant case, which has been additionally examined in different circumstances, such as the state of the driving of the driver of the other vehicle and the location after the collision of the other vehicle.

In light of the fact that the CD’s image made a copy of a video file recorded in CCTV contains a statement that “it is difficult to confirm whether the instant traffic accident occurred because the Defendant was frightened by the central line,” the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the instant traffic accident occurred due to the negligence in the course of carrying the central line while the Defendant was driving Orab, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently. Therefore, the other prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.