교통사고처리특례법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The case is remanded to Daegu District Court for stay.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal in this case is that the center line of yellow solid lines was installed, and the vehicle was parked on the right side of the Defendant’s running direction, and as such, the Defendant should have stopped before the right side and checked whether there was no vehicle, etc. being driven on the opposite line.
However, since the Defendant did not take such measures and affected the median line, there was an inevitable reason to injure the Defendant’s central line.
or not falling under “when it is impossible to pass on the right side of the road due to destruction of the road, road works, other obstacles, etc.”
The judgment of the court below which dismissed the prosecution of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.
2. Determination
A. Article 13(4)2 of the Road Traffic Act provides, “Where it is impossible to pass the right side of a road due to destruction, road construction, or other obstacles, etc. of the road,” the traffic may pass beyond the center line, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 13(3) of the Road Traffic Act.
Here, “other obstacles, etc. are unable to pass along the right side of the road” refers to the cases where passage is impossible due to changes in the shape of the road itself to the extent corresponding to “damage or road construction”, and the cases where a vehicle or two prices are parked shall not be deemed to fall under such cases.
However, if a vehicle has been parked in more than a number of consecutive lanes, it is foreseeable that the driver of the vehicle travelling on the opposite side would not pass the opposite side without exceeding the central line. In such a case, there is only room for constituting “other disability where it is impossible to pass the right side of the road”.
According to the facts acknowledged by the court below, the defendant's accident of this case.