Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for four months.

Costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

Criminal facts

On November 20, 2015, the Defendant driving a J-wing truck around 07:20 on November 20, 2015, and driving the intersection where the signal, etc. is installed in front of Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul, with the intersection from the surface of the radio wave hub distance to the radio wave range, the Defendant straighted four-lanes among the five-lanes.

Since there is an intersection with a signal apparatus, there was a duty of care to prevent accidents by safely proceeding in accordance with the new code as a person engaging in driving of a motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected to do so and led to the left-hand turn at the end of the driver's e-sports cargo vehicle in the victim's e-sports cargo vehicle, which was going to the left-hand turn in accordance with the new subparagraph.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from the Defendant’s occupational negligence on the part of the victim L, approximately 12 weeks of injury, such as cutting down the upper ball of the water pipe at the right side, and injury to the Defendant’s N on the part of the Defendant’s vehicle, such as salt, tension, etc. requiring approximately 2 weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness, LO, P, Q and R;

1. Each police statement aboutO, P, or L;

1. A report on internal investigation:

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. The signal modernization;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. On-site photographs at the time of accident;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel for the comprehensive analysis of traffic accidents asserts that they did not violate the signals given by the defendant.

The following circumstances acknowledged by each of the above evidence (i.e., ① the victim L, and theO, P, and R that have observed the signal of the victim driving vehicle from the investigative agency to this court consistently, and the victim driving vehicle stated that the vehicle was in conflict with the Defendant driving vehicle, which was directly under the right turn to the left at the intersection by receiving the left turn, and ② the crosswalk in the direction where the victim driving vehicle was in line with the Defendant driving vehicle.