The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The accused of the grounds for appeal does not have intentionally caused a traffic accident, as described in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts charged and by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In determining the credibility of a victim’s statement, etc. supporting the facts charged, the credibility of a witness’s statement should be assessed on the sole basis of the following: (a) whether the content of the statement itself conforms to the logical contradiction or empirical rule; (b) whether the statement conforms to the witness’s evidence or third party’s statement; and (c) the appearance or attitude of the witness who is going to an oath before and after being sworn by a judge; and (d) the appearance and appearance of the witness who is going to the witness’s statement in the open court, which is difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, by directly observing various circumstances that make it difficult to record (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 209; 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012; and (b) whether the statement conforms with the victim’s testimony in light of the fact that it is somewhat inconsistent with the witness’s statements in the first part, it cannot be denied without permission for the victim’s testimony (see Supreme Court Decision 201207Do1784.

A witness of the first instance trial is a witness of the first instance trial, taking into account the special circumstances or the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of the appellate trial.