A. The court below found the victim guilty of the facts charged despite the fact that the defendant left left the left-hand turn in the area where the crime of this case was prohibited, but the relation between the occurrence of the accident of this case and the defendant's negligence was not recognized, and rather, the cause of the accident of this case was caused.

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., the victim, who made a left turn to the left by the Defendant at an investigative agency, have caused the instant accident.

In full view of the facts that the defendant stated, ② through a fact-finding report, traffic accident scene and vehicle photo, and black image, he can confirm the fact that the defendant left the left at the time, even though the defendant had a sign prohibiting the left-hand turn on the direction of the defendant at the time, and ③ the defendant himself also recognized the negligence that the defendant left the left-hand turn from the prohibition area from the investigation agency to the trial court, ④ if the defendant would have complied with the signal at the time of the accident, and ④ if the defendant would have complied with the signal at the time of the accident, he could sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant caused a traffic accident by the left-hand turn and sustained injury to the victim, so the above argument by the defendant

B. It is recognized that the victim’s negligence in determining the illegality of sentencing is likely to have affected the occurrence and expansion of the instant accident, and that the degree of injury suffered by the victim is not much serious.

However, there is no agreement with the victim until the defendant's negligence is serious, the sentencing is balanced with the same kind of crime, and the age of the defendant.