The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who is engaged in driving a motor vehicle for D Le-Support.

On February 29, 2012, at around 16:30, the Defendant continued to drive the said vehicle from the new parallel to Daegu on the front side of the Fmaart E in the Glurgic Zone E.

At all times, the road is a place where the yellow-ray center line is installed, and there was a duty of care to safely operate the vehicle. However, the Defendant neglected this duty and received the front portion of the victim G(39 years old) driving on the upper left side of the vehicle due to the negligent negligence of the center line, which led to the victim G(39 years old) driving on the margin side of the vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as satisfinal finites, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment by occupational negligence as above.

2. Determination:

A. As to whether the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle invadeds the central line at the time of the instant accident, it is not sufficient to recognize that the Defendant’s vehicle was invaded by the central line at the time of the instant accident, and there is evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

① According to the black image, it is difficult to recognize the fact that the above black was invadedd by the central line before the collision between the Defendant’s ready-light car (hereinafter “responing car,” “responing car”) and the G Driving car (hereinafter “respony”) (16:22:53: 53 seconds). However, there is no video around 12 seconds from the above perspective (16:2: 54 seconds) to the time of the accident and after the accident (16: 23: 08 seconds) after the accident. Thus, it is insufficient to recognize that the above video was invadedd by the central line at the time of the accident.

② The G’s statement is merely based on the above black images.