The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the prosecutor's appeal is determined as stated in the court below's decision based on each report of the Road Traffic Authority and the National Institute of Scientific Investigation, which analyzed the accident of this case based on the black booms, but considering the fact that the black box does not contain any actual situation observed by the driver, and the location and date of the occurrence of this case, at the time of the accident of this case, the defendant had a duty of care to reduce speed and to check the right and the right and the right and the right of the defendant at the time of the accident of this case, and the previous vehicle according to the same direction one lane as the defendant discovered and immediately avoided the accident of this case, the defendant is recognized as both predictability, possibility of avoidance, existence of a duty of care and the violation.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting the charged facts of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

2. The indictment shall be deemed ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal due to changes in indictment.

In the trial, the prosecutor applied for permission to change the existing facts charged as shown in the attached Form, and this court permitted it and changed the object of the trial.

This part of the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

However, even if there are these reasons, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of the judgment of the changed facts charged.

3. Judgment on the prosecutor's grounds for appeal

A. It is as stated in the revised indictment attached to the facts charged.

B. The revised facts charged included the duty of care in driving required by the Defendant at the time of the instant accident and the Defendant’s negligence in the original facts charged.

The lower court on the following grounds.