beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), the traffic accident analysis report of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation by the National Institute of Criminal Investigation by the Korea Institute of Criminal Investigation by the fact that the distance from the point where the defendant could have observed the damaged vehicle to the damaged vehicle is 25 meters is presumed to have been merely 21 meters, and thus, if the defendant at a limited speed, he could have avoided a collision with the damaged vehicle, he can be fully convicted of the facts charged in the instant case. In full view of the above, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court of the lower judgment, the lower court determined that the instant facts charged constituted a case where there is no proof of crime and sentenced the Defendant not guilty.
1) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of the court below, ① the accident site of this case is a road of four lanes in which signal lights are installed, and at the time of the accident of this case, the Defendant’s vehicle was moving directly to the area of Daejeon District (hereinafter “driving direction”) in accordance with the straight line with the signal signals installed on the above road, and ② the opposite direction immediately before the accident of this case (hereinafter “the opposite direction”) was stopped to turn to the left or to turn to the left.
The fact that there was a vehicle in SUV (hereinafter referred to as the "vehicle"), ③ the signal of the opposite direction at the time was a straight line signal for which U.V. is not allowed to be a U.S., but the victim started driving along one lane in the opposite direction, and started the U.V., and the Defendant’s vehicle entered one lane in the opposite direction and received the right side of the damaged vehicle as it is.
2) According to the above facts, the defendant's person who violated the signal.