The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the driver of a passenger car by borrowing B.

On May 14, 2017, the Defendant driven the said vehicle, and around 16:54 on May 14, 2017, the Defendant violated the signal to the head of the office head office and the left turn to the left at the front distance of the common apartment in the front of the common apartment in the front of the common apartment in the front of the common apartment in the Pakdong.

2. Determination

A. On November 24, 2017, the Defendant stated the summary of his/her oral argument in the summary of the statement No. 4 page No. 4 in the summary of the statement No. 2 on-the-spot map to C, and there is no fact that he/she made a U.S. turn to the left, in violation of the corresponding head office and head office, from the front-dong main apartment.

B. In this case, there is no CCTV images or vehicle boom images at the scene of signal violations at the time of the determination control, each testimony of C and D, the on-site control police officer, shall be deemed as the only evidence.

In this regard, the witness C does not directly witness the appearance of the defendant's violation of signal, but when D stops and controls the defendant's vehicle, they are disputed with each other as a matter of regulation. In this case, the witness sees the signal of the road from the gyppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp

The witness D, while he discovered prior vehicles in front of the defendant's vehicle at the time of his crackdown and issued a penalty Stick at any time while other vehicles were in the presence of the defendant's vehicle and confirmed from time to time that other vehicles violated the signal, the defendant's vehicle was clearly present at the front side of the front-dong main apartment and discovered the defendant to turn to the left, and the defendant was exposed to the signal violation.

2.1.2