The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the case of a mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles before the right of way at the intersection, unless there is a separate signal for a right of way, the pedestrian signal on the crosswalk cannot be deemed to be a vehicle signal immediately after the passage through the intersection. The instant accident occurred on the crosswalk while the right of way was passed immediately after the passage through the intersection, and the signal apparatus for a signal for a vehicle fit at the time of entry to the intersection is not red, and thus, the Defendant does not drive in violation of the signal.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended sentence on October, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, it can be recognized that the defendant, at the time of passing through the intersection and immediately bypassing the intersection, a pedestrian signal was placed on the crosswalk, and at the same time, a vehicle signal apparatus on the ground of the crosswalk was red signal, and that the defendant confirmed that the pedestrian signal was green signal at the time of passing through the crosswalk. Thus, since the defendant passed through and operates the crosswalk, the accident of this case can be seen as an accident due to the signal violation.

(A) On the other hand, the Defendant asserted that the signal apparatus for the foregoing red vehicle is only applicable to the vehicle directly driven by the Defendant, and that it does not apply to the vehicle to the vehicle to be towed by the Defendant. However, in light of the fact that the driver of the vehicle should temporarily stop in front of the crosswalk, the above signal for the vehicle to be used in front of the crosswalk, as well as the vehicle to be towed by the Defendant, is performing the function of informing the pedestrian signal state of the crosswalk to the vehicle to be towed by the Defendant. In light of the above, the above argument is without merit.

B. The degree of injury suffered by the victim on the assertion of unfair sentencing is as follows.