The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person engaged in driving C vehicles.

On November 24, 2014, around 17:50 on 17:50 on Cheongju-si, the Defendant directed the front of the first and second apartment in front of the Gu office of Cheongju-si, in the direction from the educulation distance to the educulation distance.

Since a signal, etc. is installed, there was a duty of care to safely drive a person engaged in driving service in accordance with the signals, by reducing speed and checking the right and the right of the driver.

Nevertheless, by neglecting this, the defendant neglected that the vehicle driving signal was changed to the stop signal, and due to negligence, the victim D driven by the left side from the right side of the proceeding direction to the left side, led the front part of the vehicle to go beyond the victim's surface.

The Defendant suffered injury, such as 6,7 cage cage cage cages, etc., on the left-hand side, which requires approximately five weeks of medical treatment due to such occupational negligence.

2. Determination

A. 1) The Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that the Defendant did not violate the signal. 2) The victim stated that, in the investigative agency and this court, his direction signal was changed to the vehicle signal, the Defendant violated the signal. According to the video of the accident videocad, the vehicle in the direction of the Defendant’s proceeding entered the intersection at the time when the vehicle stops.

In addition, the statement of the victim is persuasive to some extent that it does not violate the signal in the case of the victim, etc. who drives the Obba in order to deliver it from the Chinese office, in the case of the intersection where the accident is also the place where the crossing is wide and rapid.

3. However, notwithstanding the above facts and circumstances, the victim is the Defendant’s intersection in green signals in light of the following circumstances: