The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) caused the instant traffic accident by negligence in violation of the signal, the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who drives his gallon stallon vehicle.

On December 22, 2010, the Defendant, at the time of Daejeon Pungdong on December 22:10, 2010, turned down the flow from the parallel of Korea to the four-lane distance in the direction of the street.

Since there is a place where a signal, etc. is installed, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to check whether there is a person who is responsible for driving service to reduce speed and to check the right and the right and the right, and to drive safely according to the new subparagraph.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so, while proceeding with the vehicle straight signal, was due to the negligence that the vehicle straightened and proceeded. At this time, the front front and rear door of the DESMIS car, which turn to the left at the right angle signal in the direction of the front direction of the Madlese-distance from the Madlese-distance off side, was shocked by his front front and rear door.

Ultimately, due to the above occupational negligence, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim E (the South and the 33 years old), such as fluoral salt, etc., which requires treatment for about three weeks, and injury to the victim F (the 48 years old), such as dluoral dluoral dale, bones, etc., which requires treatment for about four weeks.

B. The lower court determined that there were statements, traffic accident reports, investigation reports, and yellow survey reports, etc. at the investigative agencies and the trial date of the victimized vehicle E and the driver of the victimized vehicle F, who is the passenger of the victimized vehicle, as direct evidence related to the instant facts charged. In light of the signal system of the intersection or the background of the accident at which the instant accident occurred, only one of the Defendant or E.