Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 30,000 won shall be one day.

A driver of any motor vehicle that drives along a road shall drive the motor vehicle in accordance with the signals indicated by traffic safety facilities.

On March 3, 2017, the Defendant driven a C truck on March 14:20, while driving the truck around the crosswalk in front of the sloping-dong, Young-dong, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, and driving the truck in violation of the signal, without stopping in front of the red signals.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the witness D’s statutory statement legislation;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 156 subparagraph 1 and 5 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

2. Article 70 (1) and Article 69 (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse.

3. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. As to the assertion that the Defendant did not violate the signal, in light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the Defendant used the signal as stated in the facts constituting the crime.

It is reasonable to see that it is reasonable.

This part of the defendant and defense counsel are not accepted.

① A witness D, a police officer controlling the Defendant’s violation of signal, was under control in this Court, “At the time, the witness D was under control by viewing signal apparatus in front of the E stations.”

After the red signal was on-and-off, approximately two to three seconds passed, the Defendant's vehicle passed the stop line.

The position of the stop line was accurately known because it has been regulated at the intervals of 3 days between 9 days and 9 days at the control place.

B. The visual power is 1.5 respectively.

“The statement was made to the effect that it was “.”

② The aforementioned statements made by D are believed in line with the distance between the place of control and the stop line at the time, or road conditions, and there is no other reason to suspect the credibility of the above statements.

2. As to the Defendant’s assertion that the instant indictment was improper, there are several defendants.