The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the gist of the grounds for appeal can be acknowledged that the defendant did not take any measures to cope with the occurrence of a traffic accident and that B did not take any measures to cope with the said traffic accident. Thus, the facts charged in the instant case are fully found guilty.

Nevertheless, the court below's decision that acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misconception of facts.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following facts acknowledged by the record, the lower court: (a) left the site B where contact was received from the Defendant and arrived at the site; (b) was a driver, and was in charge of accident management.

Therefore, there was a measure to ensure smooth traffic at the accident site where the defendant should have separately taken.

For the reason that it is difficult to see it, not guilty was pronounced.

① After causing a traffic accident, the Defendant called B within the vehicle, and arrived at B after about five minutes from the time of the accident.

(2) B proposed that D, who is a driver of another vehicle, be responsible for the repair costs and medical expenses of the vehicle, will replace the driver, and the defendant will be sent.

I laid off.

(3) When a police officer was called to the scene of an accident, only B and D remains, and B were driving for the first time.

The defendant was driving only when repeatedly argued that he was driving.

(4) On the spot where an accident occurred, the two-lane bus stop was front of the two-lane bus stop, and the new wall time was the time.

B. The above determination by the court below is justifiable even if it was examined in the above trial, and thus, the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.