The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

A person who operates along the straight line with the straight line on which a yellow solid line is installed with the median line shall, unless there are special circumstances, proceed with the trust that the person operates the straight line will safely operate it in compliance with traffic regulations, and even if the person finds in advance the vehicle that enters the straight line outside of the opposite line, it is difficult to expect that the vehicle go beyond the median line in a way that obstructs its course.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as cited by the court below in comparison with the records, the defendant is the owner of the passenger car operated by the non-party 1, and the above identity metal is the place where the non-party 1 is operating the motor vehicle on his own behalf, and the two straight lines are two straight lines at the time of the accident, where the two straight lines are straight lines at the time of the accident, and the two straight lines are straight lines at the speed of about 50 kilometers at the speed of about 50 kilometers at the speed of the Sin-gu Incheon, Nam-gu, Incheon, which is the two straight lines at the time of the accident, and the two straight lines at the opposite line at the time of the accident, and the two straight lines at the front line at the time of the opposite line at the time of the accident, and even if the vehicle did not think of the left-hand turn to the left-hand turn, the defendant's two straight lines at the time of the accident, and even if the vehicle did not turn to the left-hand turn to the left, it can be found to the left.

The court below erred in citing the fact that the above identity metal was delayed at the time and the main line changed from the second line to the first line. However, according to the records, it is difficult to proceed to the second line at a speed of 60 knife, so it is difficult to speed up to 50 knife, and there is only the statement of the co-defendant of the court of first instance at the investigative agency as evidence corresponding thereto as to the change of the vehicle at the accident point. However, according to the police's actual investigation report on traffic accident, the identity metal continued to proceed at the middle of the second line at the time of the accident, and therefore, the vehicle parked on the road at the time continues to proceed to the middle of the second line at the time of the accident, and the vehicle did not change the vehicle.

In full view of the above facts and the determination of legal principles, the court below's rejection of the defendant's claim for exemption under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act was found to have violated the rules of evidence through insufficient deliberation, or it was considered that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the requirements for exemption under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and thus the decision of other grounds for appeal is not required to be reversed.

Therefore, the part of the judgment below against the defendant is reversed and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)