logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2013.12.20 2013고정2232
도로교통법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is C C C C C C’s owner and is a driver.

On August 28, 2013, at around 15:16, the Defendant driving the said vehicle as its businesses, and straighted the front road of the same apartment of the Round-dong in Gwangju Northern-gu from the direction of the Viennae-gu to the stop signal while driving in the direction of the Bennae-gu in the direction of the Bennae-gu.

2. As to the above facts charged by the defendant, the defendant asserts that he did not violate his signal, and that he cannot accurately see the fact that the defendant violated his signal at the place where the control police officer took place.

3. In full view of the images of the instant road pictures attached to the written opinion submitted by the Defendant and the video images taken by the traffic signals of the instant case at the location of the traffic control police officer, and the testimony in this court of the traffic control police officer D, etc., the traffic control police officer does not appear directly on the crosswalk or the vehicle on the crosswalk in which the Defendant violated the signal, and the vehicle in the direction where the traffic control police officer is located is located, and the vehicle can only proceed to a certain extent in the direction in which the traffic police officer controlled the above crosswalk (the crosswalk in this case is at a place higher than the place where the traffic police officer controlled the traffic. In other words, the crosswalk in this case is at a place where the traffic direction of the Defendant is obstructed). The traffic control police officer may recognize the fact that the traffic signals installed on the above crosswalk in front of the traffic signals installed on the crosswalk in front of the vehicle, and, in light of the above recognition fact, the traffic police officer, despite proceeding the traffic signals of the instant case, should immediately be ruled out to the location of the Defendant and the traffic police officer.

arrow