The meaning of "when the center line of the road on which a lane is installed" under the proviso of Article 3 (2) 2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

In light of the legislative intent of Article 3(2) proviso of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, when a vehicle that caused a traffic accident gets involved in the median line of the road where the lane is installed in violation of the provisions of Article 13(2) of the Road Traffic Act in the former part of Article 3(2) proviso of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents shall be interpreted not to refer to all cases where the traffic accident occurred in excess of the median line but to cases where the traffic accident occurred in excess of the median line without any justifiable reason.

The proviso to Article 3 (2) 2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents

Defendant

Prosecutor

Daejeon District Court Decision 86No620 delivered on February 27, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the legislative intent of Article 13(2) of the Road Traffic Act, the term “if a vehicle which caused a traffic accident intrudes on the median line of the road where the lane is installed in violation of the former part of Article 3(2)2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents” means not all cases where the traffic accident occurred beyond the median line, but it means the median line in cases where an accident is caused by breaking the median line without any justifiable reason. However, according to the facts charged in this case, although the traffic accident in this case takes place beyond the median line, although the traffic accident in this case takes place beyond the median line, it is erroneous that the Defendant turns down from 2 to 1 to 2 to 1 to 1 to 2 of the former part of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, it does not constitute an unlawful act in light of the legal principle of the proviso of Article 2(2) of the former part of the Road Traffic Act, and it does not constitute an unlawful act in this case.

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

Justices Yellow-ray (Presiding Justice)