[1] In a case where an intersection traffic island is installed and a bypass is installed on the right side of the intersection, whether the act of bypassing along a bypass not a bypassing lane violates Article 25(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (affirmative in principle)

[2] In a case where the Defendant, a driver of a motor vehicle, was prosecuted for violating the former Road Traffic Act bypassing the right lane between two straight laness in the intersection where traffic islands are installed and the right lane is separated from the right lane, and the right lane is installed, the case holding that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the ground that the Defendant’s act does not contravene the “intersection traffic method” as provided by Article 25(1) of the same Act

[1] In full view of the contents and purport of Articles 25(1) and 2 subparag. 12 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 10382, Jul. 23, 2010) and Articles 2 subparag. 24, 43, and 32(3) of the Regulations on the Standards for Structure and Facilities of Roads, drivers who intend to make a right-hand through an intersection where traffic islands are installed and a right-hand lane is installed along the right-hand lane, shall proceed along the right-hand lane of the road, except in extenuating circumstances. They shall not proceed through a right-hand lane along the right-hand lane, and shall not move through a right-hand lane, other than a right-hand lane, through a right-hand lane.

[2] In a case where the Defendant, who is a motor vehicle driver, was indicted for violating the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 10382, Jul. 23, 2010) on the ground that the Defendant’s act could be avoided by entering the intersection according to the right edge of a straight line other than the above intersection, on the premise that the Defendant’s act does not violate the method of passage through the intersection as stipulated in Article 25(1) of the said Act, on the contrary that the Defendant’s act could not be circumvented by entering the intersection, on the contrary that the right edge of a straight line than the said intersection is located in the traffic island and where a straight lane is installed along the right edge of the intersection, the case holding that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

[1] Article 2 subparag. 12 (see current Article 2 subparag. 13) and Article 25(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 10382, Jul. 23, 2010); Article 2 subparag. 24, 43, and 32(3) of the Rules on the Standards for Structure and Facilities of Roads / [2] Articles 25(1) and 156 subparag. 1 of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 10382, Jul. 23, 2010)

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul Western District Court Decision 2011No278 decided July 7, 2011

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Western District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 25(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 10382, Jul. 23, 2010; hereinafter “former Road Traffic Act”) provides that “When intending to make a right-hand through an intersection, all drivers of vehicles shall pass along the right-hand side of the road in advance and pass through the right-hand side of the road,” and Article 2 Subparag. 12 of the same Act provides that “an intersection means the intersection of two or more roads (in the case of a road divided by a sidewalk and a roadway, referring to the roadway) by Tro, or by two or more roads (in the case of a road divided by a sidewalk, referring to the roadway).”

On the other hand, Article 2 subparagraph 24 of the Regulations on the Standards for Structure and Facilities of Roads (wholly amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 101 on February 19, 2009) provides that "the revolving lane means a lane installed separately from the lane that is straight so that motor vehicles can make a right-hand, left-hand, or right-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-on-hand-on-hand-on-hand-on-hand-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-on-way-

In full view of the contents and purport of the aforementioned relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, drivers who intend to make a right-way at an intersection where traffic islands are installed and a right-hand lane is installed along the right-hand lane of the road, barring special circumstances, shall make a right-hand along the right-hand lane of the road, and shall not make a right-hand by entering the intersection according to a right-hand lane which is not a right-hand lane.

According to the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, although it could be known that the intersection of this case is installed with a traffic island and a bypassing lane separated from the two straight lanes above the right side of the intersection of this case, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s bypassing to the intersection is not in violation of the method of passage through the intersection as provided by Article 25(1) of the former Road Traffic Act, on the premise that the right side side side of the straight lane which is not the bypassing lane, but the right side side side of the right side side of the straight line, on the premise that the bypassing to the intersection of this case is possible. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to Article 25(1) of the former Road Traffic Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. The ground of appeal assigning this error is with merit.

Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Poe-young (Presiding Justice)