도로교통법위반
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 60,000 won.
Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 20,000 won shall be one day.
Punishment of the crime
On June 17, 2013, at around 10:15, the Defendant, while driving a Cschton vehicle, moved the way of the non-power distance located in Pyeongtaek-si to the new-dong non-exclusive road, and such place is a place where a bypass signal, etc. is installed, the Defendant was in violation of the obligation to make a bypass according to the new subparagraph, even though he was obliged to do so.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. Legal statement of witness D;
1. Application of statutes governing enforcement manuals;
1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and Articles 156 subparagraph 1 and 5 of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;
1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion of the provisional payment order against the defendant and defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that if there is no pedestrian, even if there is a bypass signal, it cannot be controlled by the signal violation even if there is no pedestrian, and the defendant's suspension signal was suspended at the crosswalk according to the police officer's stop signal, it is not the signal violation but the stop line violation
A driver of a vehicle who drives along a road is obliged to drive the vehicle in accordance with the signals indicated by the traffic safety facilities. Since the signals mentioned above include a bypass signal, it is necessary to take responsibility for violating the signal signals in accordance with Article 156 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act.
In addition, according to the evidence of this case, the defendant stopped the vehicle only by using the stop signal of the police officer controlling the vehicle while driving in violation of the signal signal without the intention to keep the right-way signal, and since the fronter of the defendant's vehicle stops at the end of the crosswalk, the defendant's vehicle stopped in violation of the signal.
Therefore, the defendant.