All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant is not allowed to drive a vehicle in violation of the signal.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (the suspended sentence of KRW 700,000,000) is too unfilled and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence of this case as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts is difficult to accept part of the reasons in the judgment of the court below. However, according to the evidence adopted and examined by the trial court on the part that there is a stop line on both sides of the crosswalks based on the direction of the defendant at the intersection of this case, a stop line prior to the entrance of the crosswalks but a stop line after the entry of the crosswalks is recognized as the end of the bicycle crossing.) In other words, under subparagraph 2 of attached Table 2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act in the case of yellow light, vehicles and horses shall immediately stop on the road immediately before the stop line or the crosswalk, and under subparagraph 12 of Article 2 of the Road Traffic Act, if already entering the intersection, it refers to the "intersection" as the "intersection," or "T or more persons," or the roads and the roadways are divided into at least two roads and the roadways.

(2) According to the statement of the witness F of the court below, it is proper that the court below determined that the defendant violated the signal, when the defendant passed the stop line of this case and entered the crosswalk, and the yellow signal was changed to the yellow signal, and even after the passage of the crosswalk, the defendant should stop the intersection if he entered the crosswalk before entering the intersection (in the crosswalk, it is not recognized that the defendant entered the crosswalk and entered the intersection. The above crosswalk is not within the intersection.).