[1] The meaning of "any place used for ordinary traffic" as a concept of road under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act

[2] The case affirming the judgment of the court below that the gas injecting area in a gas charging station cannot be deemed as a road used for general traffic as provided by Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act

[1] Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act / [2] Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 2002Do6710 Delivered on June 25, 2004

Defendant

Prosecutor

Daejeon District Court Decision 2005No606 Decided September 8, 2005

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act, the term "road" means the roads under the Road Act, the roads under the Toll Road Act, and all other places used for general traffic. The term "any place used for general traffic" in this context means an open area which is actually public for the passage of people or vehicles, where there is a public nature of the general traffic police authority for the purpose of maintaining order in traffic, etc., and only the specific persons or those who have a specific building related thereto may use it and independently manage it (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do6710, Jun. 25, 2004, etc.).

The court below determined based on the facts stated in its reasoning that the gas injection area, etc. in the gas filling station of this case cannot be deemed as a road used for general traffic under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act, on the grounds that part of gas charging facilities that can be used only by the specific people who are not used for gas charging, etc., such as gas charging, or by only those who have a specific building related thereto, where the operator voluntarily manages it, or that it cannot be deemed as a place where an unspecified person or a public place has a public nature that affects the general traffic police authority. In light of the above legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is just and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to roads used for general traffic under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

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

Justices Yang Sung-tae (Presiding Justice)