Whether the principle of trust is applied to a case where a pedestrian gets out of a vehicle behind the opposite lane in which the signal of a crosswalk is red (affirmative)

As a driver of a vehicle, it cannot be said that the driver of the vehicle should exercise his duty of care by predicting the situation where the signal of the crosswalk would not cut down behind the vehicle that stops on the opposite side while being red.

Article 268 of the Criminal Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Han-sung, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

A

Prosecutor

Daegu District Court Decision 92No421 delivered on May 28, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

As a driver of a vehicle, it cannot be said that the driver of the vehicle should exercise his duty of care by predicting that the pedestrian will not collapse behind the vehicle that stops on the opposite side while the signal of the crosswalk is red (see Supreme Court Decision 87Do132 delivered on September 8, 1987).

The assistance that the court below recognized the facts of the judgment and rendered the judgment of the court below, and found the defendant not guilty, shall be justified and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to negligence. The arguments are without merit.

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