The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) caused the instant accident by the negligence of having entered the intersection by violating the signal, and thus, the court below found the Defendant not guilty, which erred by misapprehending the fact and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The Defendant is engaged in the duty of driving C-si.

On July 6, 2011, the Defendant driving the above vehicle around 03:10, and driving the front road of the second apartment complex in the Suwon Mine-gu, Gwangju, with two lanes from the boundary of the New Chang District to the lower-nam Industrial Complex, the Defendant proceeded about 60km each other at a speed of about 60km each other.

At the same time, there was an intersection where signal lights are installed, so in such a case, the driver of the motor vehicle has a duty of care to safely drive the motor vehicle according to the traffic signal and prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant is negligent in driving a vehicle by negligence and continues to run the vehicle at the same speed by violating the signal, even though the signal is a stop signal.

On the left side of the proceeding, the E-car driven by D, which has driven by the intersection in violation of the signal to the right side, conflict with the part of the taxi fronter of the defendant (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

In the end, the defendant's occupational negligence caused about two weeks to the victim FF (the age of 38) who boarded the defendant's driver's vehicle to suffer from the snow grass requiring treatment for about two weeks, open eye around the snow.

3. The judgment of the court below

가. 공소사실에 부합하는 정황 증인 G, H의 각 일부 법정진술, G, H에 대한 각 경찰 진술조서의 일부 진술기재, 수사보고(사고장소 교차로 신호체계도)의 기재에 의하면, G과 H은 경찰 및 이 법정에서, 자신들은 이 사건 사고 당시 피고인 운전의 택시와는 반대방향에서 진행을 하고 있었는데 쿵...