At around 16:30 on August 25, 2013, the Defendant driven the said car at the first-lane of the car advertising company in front of the Crata-dong at the Shyeong-dong, and proceeded to the distance from the Pyeong Tri-gu on the right side of the Plyeong-dong.

At this point, there are one lane and the center line of yellow solid lines, so the defendant has a duty of care to safely proceed with the vehicle line.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and proceed to a opposite opposite line to the median line in order to circumvent it.

When returning to the original lane, the part front of the E-Motor vehicle driving seat of the victim D's victim who was followed was sent to the front line of the Defendant's vehicle, and the damaged vehicle was crashed into the dry field under approximately two meters below the road.

In the end, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim D, who is the driver of the damaged vehicle due to occupational negligence in the central line, by causing about two weeks of medical treatment. The Defendant suffered injury to the victim F, who was in a dry field where the damaged vehicle was crashed, for three weeks of medical treatment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The main point of the Defendant’s assertion is that the instant traffic accident is not caused by the central line collision.

B. (1) Article 3(2) proviso proviso 2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents provides that when a person commits a crime of occupational injury or death, etc. due to an act of breaking the center line of a road on which a tea line is installed, the act of infringing on the median line was conducted without taking other appropriate measures to avoid the obstacles occurring on the proceeding line.

He/she intends to operate his/her own car or to maintain his/her own car, but has not been able to do so due to external circumstances that he/she could not control.