logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.01.16 2013고단3613
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. On June 11, 2013, the Defendant is driving a CK5 car on June 11, 2013, the Defendant is driving a two-lane between two-lanes on the way from the south-dong side of Gwangju Mine to the direction of black sand distance.

In order to proceed to the direction of the monthly valley, the internship was made.

In such cases, a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by safely making a U.S. internship at the permissible point of practice.

Nevertheless, while neglecting this, the Defendant, while making an intern at a place where a yellow solid line is installed, had the victim D(39 years of age) shocked the front part of the EM520 car driven by the victim D(39 years of age) before the left end of the car driven by the Defendant.

As a result, the Defendant suffered, by negligence in the above occupational negligence, injury to the victim F (the age of 42), the victim G (the age of 17) boarding the victim’s vehicle, and the victim H (the age of 19) of the bones of wood, tension, etc. requiring treatment for about two weeks.

2. The facts charged in the instant case and applicable provisions of the Act alone mean the Defendant’s breach of duty under Article 13(3) of the Road Traffic Act, and it is not clear whether the Defendant’s breach of duty under Article 62 of the Road Traffic Act refers to the breach of duty of prohibition of internship under Article 62 of the Road Traffic Act

A. Determination as to whether the Defendant violated the median line is a provision for the protection of the trust of the driver of the opposite vehicle that the driver’s duty to pass along the right side of the center line under Article 13(3) of the Road Traffic Act does not enter beyond the center line (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do2116, Jul. 7, 2000). Thus, in order to constitute the median line under Article 3(2) proviso 2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, the driver’s act of intrusion at least the center line is required, and the center line is required.

arrow