Defendant

Chuncheon

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The facts charged in this case

The defendant is (vehicle registration number omitted) a person who is engaged in driving and operating business of a motor vehicle in a gender set.

On July 30, 2008, the Defendant driven the said car on July 16, 2008, and proceeded ahead of the road 505-dong, 393, 393, in the direction of the city, to the speed of about 20 km from the scam scambing off to the scam agricultural and fishery product market. It is a three-distance road where signal lights and crosswalks are installed, and any bicycle driven by the non-indicted (65 years old) who is the victim on the right side from the direction direction at the time is driving, and thus, in such a case, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to operate the vehicle safely by accurately operating the steering direction and operation of the steering system by accurately operating the steering direction and operation of the steering system in accordance with the new name.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and caused the victim to go beyond the floor by being a bicycle for the victim's driver driving under the new code with the front part of the car in violation of the signal.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury, such as the 12-time coloning of 12 chests, which requires medical treatment for about 10 weeks from the above occupational negligence.

2. Determination

[Attachment 2] The Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act provides that "motor vehicles and horses shall stop immediately before a stop line, crosswalk, and intersection: Provided, That motor vehicles and horses may move bypass without impeding the traffic of other motor vehicles and horses traveling pursuant to the new subparagraph," in relation to the signals displayed by a green light, "motor vehicles and horses may move by straight, and may move by straight, so as not to impede other traffic, and may turn to the left at a place where a non-protection line sign is marked, if the traffic pursuant to the new subparagraph is not obstructed, it may turn to the left, but in such cases, if the motor vehicles to turn to the left are obstructed by other traffic, it shall be liable for the violation of the signal."

In light of the contents and methods of the above attached Table, comprehensively interpreting the purport of allowing a right-hand transit from a red signal, vehicles and horses entering the intersection shall, in principle, stop once a red signal, but shall allow a right-hand transit to ensure smooth traffic flow, and impose safety duties to ensure that traffic is not impeded in order to protect the trust of other vehicles already operated under the new code, and it seems that the purpose of imposing liability for traffic signal violation under Article 3(2)1 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is not to hold out in the event of an accident in the course of a right-hand transit.

Therefore, the facts charged in this case where the Defendant made a right-hand transfer from the long distance of the front-side red signals cannot be seen as falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and Article 3(2)1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act. Meanwhile, upon examining the records of this case, the instant automobile operated by the Defendant was covered by the automobile comprehensive insurance at the time of the instant accident, and thus, the Defendant cannot be prosecuted against the Defendant pursuant to the main text of Articles 4(1) and 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. Therefore, the prosecution of this case constitutes a case where the prosecution procedure is invalid in violation of the provisions of the Act, and thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(2) of the Criminal Procedure

Judges Son Jae-chul