Since the above traffic accident can be determined by a person, the above traffic accident constitutes a crime of occupational injury or injury caused by a traffic signal violation under Article 3(1) and proviso of Article 3(2)1 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, but the court below rejected the credibility of the victim's statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case without reasonable grounds and did not violate the signal of the defendant.

Based on the judgment of the court below, it is recognized that it constitutes a ground for dismissal of public prosecution. Such judgment of the court below is erroneous by mistake.

2. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the person who is engaged in driving of CPoter trucks.

On October 27, 2014, the Defendant continued to run a dry field restaurant at a dry field middle school located in Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, with a four-distance intersection.

Since the location was an intersection where a red on-and-off signal, the driver of the vehicle had a duty of care to temporarily stop the front door and the left and right of the driver of the vehicle, while the driver of the vehicle had a duty of care to prevent accidents by checking safety and safe progress before entering the intersection.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to temporarily stop, and instead, by occupational negligence entering the intersection as is, received the front part of the G taxi part of the victim’s G taxi driving from the right side of the Defendant’s driving vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”). Accordingly, the Defendant has the victim F.