All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal principle), the court below found the Defendants guilty of causing a traffic accident by occupational negligence as stated in the facts charged in the instant case and causing the victims' death. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the mistake of facts or the possibility of occupational failure or evasion, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The court below, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is difficult to find that the Defendants failed to perform their duty of care as a driver driving on an expressway at night, even though the Defendants were able to avoid an accident by neglecting to do so on the front time prior to the occurrence of each accident or by properly manipulating the steering gear and brakes, and otherwise, the Defendants was negligent in neglecting their duty of care as a driver

The Defendants were acquitted on the grounds that there is no evidence to see that there is no evidence.

B. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts alleged by the prosecutor or misunderstanding the legal principles.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

1) A comprehensive analysis of traffic accidents prepared by S of the Cheongbuk-do branch of the Road Traffic Authority, which proves the Defendants’ occupational negligence, may be conducted by the comprehensive analysis of traffic accidents.

According to this, after the accident of this case, the Defendants proceeded in the same direction as the Defendants’ vehicles.

When determining only based solely on the data recorded in the video recording device of NF So-a-car and the results of analysis based on the driver's statement, it is highly probable that the Defendants would have been able to help avoid, and if the Defendants were forced without the direction of avoidance, the conflict with the damaged vehicle will occur, but the conflict will be reduced.