The meaning of when the center line of a road on which a lane under the former part of Article 3(2)2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is installed is invaded.

Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents refers to the case where the traffic accident is caused by driving a motor vehicle by breaking the central line in light of the legislative intent of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and the place of the traffic accident does not include all the cases where the traffic accident is the point beyond the central line.

Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning Traffic Accident Settlement

Supreme Court Decision 85Do83 delivered on March 26, 1985, Supreme Court Decision 85Do329 delivered on April 23, 1985

Defendant

Prosecutor

Gwangju District Court Decision 84No510 delivered on November 9, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court below, since this accident occurred after the defendant driving a bus around 15:00 on November 9, 1983 and driving the bicycle at a speed of 50 km high-speed Myeong-ri, Namnam, and reached the point of accident. It is the second line of 5.8 meters high-speed, which is the road at which the central line is installed, and it is 10 meters high-speed (13 years old) of the right side of the bicycle driving in the same direction, and the defendant runs the central line in order to avoid her horn, but it is not sufficient to acknowledge that the above victim's traffic accident occurred in violation of the provisions of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Management of Motor Vehicles, since the defendant's operation of the bicycle at a point above 10 meters high-speed Myeong-ri, which is an exception to the provisions of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Management of Motor Vehicles, and thus, it is sufficient to recognize that the above victim's operation of the bicycle at the central port of the above 2nd.

In the end, the judgment of the court below cannot be said to have erred by misapprehending the facts against the rules of evidence or by misapprehending the legal principles on the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. The grounds of appeal are all groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Jeon Soo-hee (Presiding Justice)