[교통사고처리특례법위반] 항소[각공2004.6.10.(10),884]
The case holding that a driver who drives in the vicinity of an intersection is not obliged to drive in the front direction by looking at well the front direction as expected to have a driver who drives in the vicinity of an intersection, even if there is a driver who drives in the vicinity of an intersection.
The case holding that a driver has no duty of care to drive a motor vehicle on the ground that it is difficult to anticipate that a pedestrian is unauthorized to cross a road without permission in the place where a pedestrian is installed in the vicinity of an eight-lane road from which the passage of the city is not secured properly, and furthermore, a driver is not obliged to drive a motor vehicle on the ground that pedestrians are expected to use a road in compliance with traffic regulations and are likely to use it at normal speed, and that there is a person with an unauthorized crossing.
Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents
[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Doz., Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)
Defendant
Kim Jong-sung
Attorney Yang Dong-chul
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. Facts charged;
On February 22, 2004, the Defendant driven a shower car at 00:48 Gwangju Metropolitan 11:1325, and proceeded at a speed of about 60 km per hour on the two-lanes from the distance off the waterside to the distance off the waterside of the mountain road located in Gwangju Dong-gu to the speed of about 60 km per hour among the four-lanes. In such a case, the driver of a motor vehicle is in poor state of vision at night, and the rain of the road is mil. In such a case, the driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to verify the career safety and drive the road without permission on the right side of the victim, who drives the road on the right side of the defendant's course due to negligence, while neglecting his duty of care, and caused the victim's death in the front part of the motor vehicle in front of the motor vehicle, and caused the victim's death in Gwangju East-dong Hospital at around 2307.
2. Determination:
A. As indicated in the above facts charged, it is reasonable to view the Defendant at the time of the instant accident as to whether there was an negligence in the course of duty not having been driven by checking well the safety of the way by checking well the left-down of the Defendant.
B. (1) According to the records of this case, the accident of this case was caused by shocking the victim who illegally crosses from the two-lane opposite to the direction of the accident at the heart (0:48) (0:0 to 01:00 on the day of the accident) (0:48) of the second-lane in the second-lane (0:00 to 01:00 on the day of the accident). Furthermore, the accident of this case was installed at the later side of 20 meters from the point of accident.
(2) As seen above, it is difficult for pedestrians to anticipate that pedestrians cross the road without permission at an eight-lane road going to and from the heart where the vision of the road is not secured properly as seen above, and a place where the road is installed near the road. Furthermore, the Defendant is not obliged to pay a duty of care to expect pedestrians to use the road at a normal speed and to drive the road at a normal speed. In addition, in the case of frequent road traffic at the night in a large city in a large city, due to the light of the headlight of the road at the night, there is considerable difficulty in discovering the view and finding the obstacles in the front direction, and it is inevitable, barring any special circumstances. Therefore, the Defendant has no obligation to prepare for the road crossing at a speed any more than once driving at normal speed, considering the function of a vehicle provided in the road traffic.
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the above facts charged premised on the above duty is a case not committing a crime, and thus the defendant is not guilty pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, since it is presumed that there is a person who will drive the road in the vicinity of the road at the same four-lane.
Judicial Sub-lease