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

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the driver of Cma business vehicle, and on October 22, 2012, 12:10, when he returns to the left of the said vehicle from the o-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si, Ansan-si, the Dong office is an intersection where a signal apparatus is installed, and thus, he neglected his duty of care to proceed in accordance with the new subparagraph despite the fact that the driver has a duty of care to go under the new subparagraph and caused the injury to the driver of the Poter vehicle due to the collision with the DPoter vehicle and the driver of the Poter-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-

2. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant did not turn to the left in violation of the signals of suspension, and that the defendant did not violate the duty of care on duty since the left turn was left to the left pursuant to the new code

As evidence consistent with the facts charged in this case, E’s statements in the investigation agency and this court, F’s investigation agency and this court, and G’s investigation agency are made.

As the testimony in the G investigation agency was made by the witness G while the witness G did not witness the instant accident in the instant court, it cannot be believed that the testimony was made by the witness G.

In addition, according to F's investigative agency and the statements in this court, F does not directly witness the accident of this case, but F is a statement to the effect that the two-lanes of the victim's vehicle in the intersection where the accident of this case occurred along the two-lanes in the direction where the victim's vehicle was in the direction of the accident of this case, and that the traffic signals at the time when the accident of this case occurred through the intersection changed the lane to the one-lanes, and the traffic signals at the time when the accident of this case occurred to the intersection was directly transmitted to the direction where the victim's vehicle was in the direction where the victim's vehicle was in the direction of the accident of this case. The statement of F alone is that the victim's vehicle was stopped at the time of the accident of this case,