도로교통법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged of the instant case, despite the duty to comply with the signals or directions indicated by traffic safety facilities during driving, the Defendant directly obstructed the signal or directions by driving the vehicle on the street in front of the Dart located in Ulsan-gu C around September 21, 2015, despite the red signal while driving the vehicle under his/her own possession, in spite of the red signal.
2. On top of a board, there is only the statement made by E, a traffic police officer, in this court and investigative agency as evidence corresponding to the above facts charged. However, in light of the fact that the defendant denied the signal violation at the time of the above control and requested confirmation of the screen of the black box attached to his/her own vehicle, but the defendant refused it without reasonable grounds, and the defendant submitted an objection on September 25, 2015, which was four days after the control date, the police officer failed to take such measures even though he/she could have sufficiently secured objective materials about the above violation through the examination of the black box box of patrol vehicle on which the above police officer was on board, and there was no material to know the reasons that it did not reach such measures, and the possibility that the traffic police officer was aware of the defendant's signal violation at the time, considering that there was no distance between the patrol of the vehicle and the defendant's vehicle at that time, it cannot be ruled out that each of the above statements by E alone is sufficient to prove the above facts charged without reasonable deliberation.
It is insufficient to view it, and there is no other evidence to prove it.
3. If so, the facts charged in the instant case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, a judgment of not guilty should be rendered after Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.