도로교통법위반
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Although the Defendant did not violate the signal as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged solely with the testimony of a traffic control police official whose credibility falls short of credibility.
2. In light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., (i) control police officers D are specifically and consistently stated in investigative agencies and court of the court below on the background of control and the situation of the Defendant’s signal violation; (ii) control is located nearest distance so as to sufficiently ascertain whether the Defendant violated the signal; and (iii) the above D appears to have no reason to make a false statement, it is recognized that the Defendant violated the signal as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.