Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found guilty of the facts charged is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In the case where the road signal apparatus is installed along the intersection, the crossing and the crosswalk are connected to the judgment on the defendant's violation of the signal, and the vehicle signal apparatus is installed only at the intersection, the vehicle signal apparatus should be deemed to also instruct the vehicle to not only the passage of the intersection but also the passage to the crosswalk immediately before the intersection. In such a case, the red light for the vehicle in such intersection is also ordered to stop at the intersection and the crosswalk. Thus, if the walking of the crosswalk is a green, all vehicles shall stop from the crosswalk stop at the crosswalk, and if it is lost as the crosswalk because the walking of the crosswalk is a red change, all vehicles shall not make a right-hand, but the vehicle on the right-hand side shall not interfere with the traffic of other vehicles that pass through the crosswalk and lose its character as the crosswalk.

Therefore, in cases where the vehicle signal of the intersection is red and the pedestrian walking of the crosswalk adjacent to the intersection is green, the driver of the vehicle does not stop in front of the above crosswalk and passes the crosswalk.

If a result of the occupational and occupational injury occurs while meeting, it constitutes a violation of signal under Article 3(1) and the proviso to Article 3(2)1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. In such cases, as long as the act of violating the above signal becomes a direct cause of traffic accident, the location of the accident shall be the crosswalk.