Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On March 28, 2015, at around 17:55, the Defendant driving a CNA-si car, and violated the signal signals of the vehicle red signal in front of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Yeongdeungpo-gu, and caused the victim E, who cross the crosswalk from the right side to the left side according to the pedestrian signal due to the occupational negligence of violating the signal signals of the vehicle red signal in front of Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, to go beyond the ground.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered damages to the victim’s left-hand joints that require approximately seven weeks of treatment due to such occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. The first police statement against the defendant (a statement to the effect that there was a red signal on the front side of the defendant's driving direction);

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to a copy of standard signal control data;

1. Relevant Article 3 (1), the proviso to Article 3 (2) 1 and 6, Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents According to the Selection of Sentence, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion that ① the defendant and his defense counsel in which this case occurred are not separately installed in front of the crosswalk in which this case occurred, and there is a separate stop line in front of the intersection, so the signal apparatus at the intersection was red.

Even if the defendant passed the crosswalk, it is not a violation of signal. ② At the time of the defendant's entry into the crosswalk, the pedestrian signal was red signal, and the defendant did not know the fact that the pedestrian signal was changed to the green signal at the time of leaving the crosswalk, and therefore, the defendant did not neglect his duty to protect pedestrians under Article 27 (1) of the Road Traffic Act.

2. The intersection shall be installed adjacent to a judgment crossing, and the signal apparatus for vehicles shall be limited to the intersection;