교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) has already been made at the time when the Defendant passed the stop line for entering the intersection, and thus, there was no violation of traffic signal, even if the Defendant violated the traffic signal.
Even if there is no relation between the defendant's violation of signal and the traffic accident of this case.
2. The Defendant also presented the same argument as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court rejected the above argument in detail, stating in detail that the judgment was “determination on the Defendant’s assertion” during the period of the appeal.
The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in detail by the court below, i.e., traffic accident comprehensive analysis: ① According to the traffic accident comprehensive analysis, the signal of this case (signal apparatus, such as a cross-section color, which is driven at the alternate slope of a mountain intersection) is occupied by a straight-line green at approximately 3 seconds, and the straight-line and right-line green signal at intervals of about 2:10:36 p.m. (on the basis of Defendant vehicle black image, 22:10:36 p.m., the above black image consisted of 30 presses.
2. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant temporarily suspended on the inside of the stop line in a state of using the signal in its original color, etc., before entering the intersection from the alternate bank to the intersection, and entered the intersection to make a right-hand turn to the viewing direction, instead of having opened the signal in its original form, the Defendant started from the straight line of the instant signal (22:10:383 presses of the instant signal) from approximately two seconds to the straight line of the instant signal (22:10:3 presses of the instant signal).