Duty of care for the violating vehicles of the driver who has the priority of passing over the intersection;

If Defendant (truck driver) first entered the intersection where traffic control is not performed, and more than the central part of the intersection, the Defendant is granted preferential right of passage pursuant to Article 21(3) of the Road Traffic Act, compared to a taxi coming from the right side of the road, from the road to the intersection. This priority right of passage, even if the width of the road where the truck passes is somewhat narrow than the width of the road where the taxi passes through, it is said that the priority right of the truck that entered the intersection is not changed first. Therefore, the above taxi has no duty of care to prevent the occurrence of the accident by disregarding the priority order of passage and by predicting that it will go through the intersection. Accordingly, in the case of a vehicle collision under such circumstances, the Defendant cannot be said to be negligent by failing to exercise his duty of care as a driver.

Article 21(3) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 268 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Busan District Court Decision 83No1989 delivered on December 1, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the prosecutor's grounds of appeal.

The court below's determination that the accident of this case occurred by comparing the evidences with the records of the court below is just, and it is not proper to acknowledge that the defendant passed the above cross-road along the above cross-road as of the time when the defendant had passed the above cross-road to direct transit as of the time of the original judgment, and that the taxi in the judgment from the right of the defendant's road to the intersection about about 104 km from the speed of the city road at the time when a significant passage to the intersection, and that the above defendant's truck's upper part of the cross-road exceeds 2 meters in vertical angle and the above defendant's truck's upper part of the cross-road at the speed above 2 meters, and the above accident of this case is not recognized to have occurred. And according to the records, since the other taxi in this case goes on the left side of the road at the time when the defendant attempted to enter the cross-road, it is reasonable to enter the above cross-road and not to reach the above 3-road road without the defendant's right of priority.

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

Justices Kang Jong-young (Presiding Justice)