On May 29, 2016, at around 18:40 on the 29th of May, 2016, the Defendant left the intersection of the river-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong

There is a duty of care to enter the intersection after temporary stop in the temporary stop line when a person engaged in driving through a four-distance intersection with a red on-and-off signal is accurately operating the brake, steering system and other devices.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected such duty of care and did not temporarily stop, and did not enter the intersection due to the negligence of entering the intersection, which conflict with the part of the front part of the vehicle where the victimized vehicle, which entered the intersection of yellow on-and-off signals, with the surface of the river located in the mouth of the river.

As a result, the defendant's work process and room caused the injury to the driver E (n, 41 years of age), the same passenger F (n, 34 years of age), and the same G (n, 48 years of age) by the same passenger, 2 weeks of diagnosis, such as the salt and tension of the shoulder pipe, and the same H (n, 45 years of age).

Judgment

1. The records show that, at the time of the collision of the victim's vehicle, the speed of the defendant's vehicle was about 20 km/h at the time of the collision of the victim's vehicle (In this regard, the defendant alleged that the defendant's vehicle was driven around 3 km/h or a speed below it at the time of shock, but when calculating the speed of the defendant's vehicle's moving of the vehicle, which is confirmed by the black stuff image, it is reasonable to view that the speed of the defendant's vehicle at the time of the collision is about 20 km/h (I's legal statement, the analysis of the driver's accident) and that according to the black stuff image, it is confirmed that the size of the defendant's vehicle and the victim's vehicle was considerably shock at the time of the collision.