The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles and mistake did not spawn the central line, and the accident of this case rather occurred with the wind coming beyond the central line as the victim sbroomed down immediately from brooms.

However, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 1,500,000) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. On October 24, 2016, the Defendant, at around 10:20 on May 24, 2016, driven 1 ton cargo vehicles, and proceeded with the first line-on road in front of “E” located in “E” in “Y” in the former North-U.D., from the jurisdictional area of Geumsan-gun to the non-Eup/Myeon.

The center line is installed, and there was a track prior to the right side in front, and in this case, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to properly observe and safely drive the vehicle. In such a case, the defendant neglected to do so, while overtaking the track on the left side while driving the vehicle on the left side, and caused the victim FF (T, South, 70 years old) driving on the opposite side of the central line due to the negligence that the center line gets over, and caused the victim to suffer brain salva for about three weeks of medical treatment.

B. 1) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by taking account of the evidence in its judgment.

2) The following circumstances revealed by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the trial court, namely, ① the victim made a concrete and consistent statement on the background of the accident to the effect that “the wind accident occurred to enter the future of the damaged vehicle while driving the damaged vehicle” in the investigative agency and the court of the lower court.