The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. On May 20, 2013, the Defendant: (a) driven a C-Motor vehicle around 03:22 on May 20, 2013; and (b) became on the crosswalk 433-7 front of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul; (c) despite that the walking, etc. of the crosswalk was green, the Defendant

2. In full view of the provisions of Article 2 subparag. 15 and Article 5 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 6, Article 7 attached Table 2 and Article 3 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, the signal apparatus on the crosswalk does not unfresh the signal apparatus for the operation of a vehicle on the road, which is a traffic signal apparatus for pedestrians who intend to pass the crosswalk, and thus, it does not constitute a case where the driver violated the signal apparatus even if the signal apparatus for the pedestrian was passed by the crosswalk when the driver becomes a green who is a pedestrian traffic signal.

(See Supreme Court Decision 88Do632 delivered on August 23, 1988). In light of the above legal principles, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be readily concluded that the defendant violated a signal signal indicating a signal apparatus, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the violation.

Thus, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment against the defendant is publicly announced under Article 58(2)