The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The appraisal by the National Science Investigation Institute, which is the most powerful evidence that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged as to the Defendant, is difficult to believe that the Defendant’s vehicle is unable to simultaneously reverse the part of the victim’s upper body and the upper half of the body of the victim, and it is merely a result of an interpretation on the premise of salking, disregarding the overall circumstances of the accident.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that recognized that the back wheels of the defendant vehicle was the part of the victim's frame according to the above appraisal result is erroneous in the misconception of facts.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court: ① the victim was sprinking out of the mouth due to the diverosis; ② the victim was dead due to the diverosis; ② the victim’s body was sprinking on the right part, the upper right part, the upper part, and the sprinking part; ③ the part where the victim’s sprinking is sprinking on the victim’s upper part and the front part of the back part; ④ the vehicle involved in the victim’s death was nived on the part of the defendant’s vehicle and M driver’s driving (hereinafter referred to as “preferred vehicle”); ⑤ the other vehicle was not related to the other vehicle; ⑤ the front part of the vehicle was shocked with the victim on the upper part of the front part, and the front part and the front part of the vehicle, other than the front part of the vehicle that had been used on the right side of the vehicle at the time, are hard to see the front part of the accident and the rear part.