On March 4, 2014, the Defendant driven the above vehicle on March 11:45, 2014, while driving the vehicle, and driving the five-lane distance from 56-lane to the Ansan License Test Station at the Gun of Ansan-si.

At all times, there is a duty of care to not make a U-turn according to the direction, because there is a supplementary sign on the front side of the way to enable a passenger car and a cargo vehicle of 1.5 tons or less.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and neglected the above supplementary marks, and led to the full right side of the victim D(31 years old)'s class E driving in which the part on the right side of the vehicle later is proceeding two lanes or more on the right side and two-lanes depending on the same direction as the other side.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury that requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment due to the following: (a) the Defendant’s negligence in the course of performing such duties; (b) the Defendant suffered from the injury.

2. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that the defendant was not negligent in making a U.S. internship since it was established in a place where assistance marking that only a vehicle with limited weight less than that is permitted is not recognizable at the time of the accident.

The phrase "in the case of operating a vehicle in violation of the direction of safety signs indicating the prohibition of passage or temporary suspension" under the proviso of Article 3 (2) 1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is premised on the premise that at least the driver might recognize or could have recognized the direction of such safety signs, and even according to the de facto survey report, the scene map of the accident, the traffic accident report, the accident vehicle, and the on-site photograph submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant begins with the left safety zone prior to reaching the distance of sight.