On November 13, 2016, the defendant driving the above cargo vehicle at around 21:50, and proceeded to turn to the left at an influent speed, leading to the 42-6 left-hand left-hand from the monthly shooting distance, located independently of the Seo-gu in Gwangju, Seo-gu, and from the boundary of the police station in Seo-gu, Seo-gu.

At that time, it was difficult to secure the view, such as the unloading of rain, and the passage of the intersection.

Since a crosswalk without signal lights is installed at the beginning of the road where a pedestrian is installed on the same side, there was a duty of care to make pedestrians safely cross the road by temporarily stopping safety distance with safety distance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected such duty of care and proceeded to the left, and the Defendant did not discover the victim D (the 61-year old age) in the left part of the crosswalk installed at the direction of the crosswalk, and received the victim’s left body flick with the front part of the freight driven by the Defendant.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from the victim’s occupational negligence such as “understanding an external wound without an open address in head,” which requires approximately six weeks of medical treatment.

2. In preparation for an ordinary predicted situation, a driver of a motor vehicle is not obliged to perform his/her duty of care to anticipate and prepare for an occurrence of an exceptional situation that is sufficient and unforeseeable (see Supreme Court Decision 85Do833, Jul. 9, 1985). In addition, in cases where a pedestrian signal, etc. on a one-way crosswalk is marked redly, a pedestrian shall not walk on the way in violation of the signal, and thus, a driver is expected to expect that the pedestrian should not cross the signal in violation of the signal on the same crosswalk, and the pedestrian shall make a red signal.